posted on February 1, 2012 in Letters
Re Theology 101, December
I always enjoy the Presbyterian Record; many of the articles are beautifully balanced without compromising the truth. However, I was a little concerned last month when reading the article, “Christ Alone.” I was expecting a strong affirmation of the basis of our faith, but the article left me confused. The article seemed to imply there are multiple ways to fellowship with God. For instance: “…Christ alone should not lead to smugness on our part, as if Christians of a certain sort have exclusive access to the mind of God.”
I completely agree that we shouldn’t be smug or arrogant, rather we should be completely humbled by the fact that Christians have exclusive access to the mind of God. Only Jesus Christ through his incarnation, suffering, death and resurrection has made it possible for us to enter into the holy of holies at any time, at any place and have direct, one to one fellowship with God.
This is the basis of Christianity. “Jesus said … ‘I am the way, and the truth, and the life; no one comes to the Father but through me.” (John 14:6).
To entertain other possibilities is not Christianity and most definitely not the reformed faith established by Calvin, Knox, et al.
I’m hoping that I have not misunderstood the article, especially since it was written by the principal of Knox College. If I have misunderstood the article, I sincerely apologize.
In any event, I would encourage us all not to waiver from the foundational truths of Christianity and not be afraid to state these truths as clearly and as uncompromisingly as they are stated in the Bible.
posted on February 1, 2012 in Letters
Re Theology 101, December
I am trying to make sense of your December editorial as well as Dorcas Gordon’s article, “Christ Alone.” You state that she addresses certain questions, although it seems to me that she merely raises them but does not address them. I am left wondering what the nature of this “deep and likely painful theological reflection” might be. Which “formularies” need to be rethought and why? And what will make this process so “painful”? It would be helpful to have an article actually addressing these questions in a forthright manner.
posted on February 1, 2012 in Letters
Re Pop Christianity, December
A big thank – you to Andrew Faiz for his December column. The Christmas season is a profoundly complex event which, yearly, we encounter with both joy and trepidation. I found comfort and a word of understanding in his wise depiction of that messy but miracle – blessed month.
posted on February 1, 2012 in Letters
Re Mary’s Journey of Faith, December
The article, Mary’s Journey of Faith by Calvin Brown touched me very deeply. You see I was born in the year of Mary so my parents named me Marion. My grandmother did not want me to be like all the other Marians so she named me Marion.
Mary the mother of God’s distinct and unique work was to say, “Yes” to the angel she encountered and to God. Even though she was puzzled, awestruck and perplexed she said, “Yes” and then on her own she went to visit her cousin Elisabeth. Elisabeth was deeply touched that her young cousin who was with child came to see her. Mary wanted to see her aged cousin and the “child leapt “in her womb.” The child was to be John the Baptizer. Mary also made the arduous journey to Bethlehem on a donkey, with Joseph at her side. She pondered what all this was about and treasured them in her heart whilst keeping her faith. It was her “Yes” that led her to love Joseph and once more they journeyed to Egypt to flee those who wished to harm Jesus who was Emmanuel. She was a young girl of great courage.
She said “Yes” at the foot of the Cross where she held the broken body of her Son. She understood and said, “Yes” to him. Can we find the courage to say “Yes” to God?
posted on February 1, 2012 in Letters
Re Theology 101, December
The “Christ Alone” doctrine is the backbone of Christianity and any attempts to expand or alter this is suspect. Jesus said that he was to only way to “come to the Father.” If Christians cave in to arguments from others who have different belief systems in the name of religious plurality that would have us change what we believe, then the truth is not being told. God does not have a “Plan B” as far as we know.
If Rev. Dr. Gordon actually believes that there is another way to have a full relationship with God then I am concerned. She says the “Christ Alone” belief leads to smugness because Christians believe that they are the only ones with access to God. She is confusing “smugness” with confidence in the truth given by the Holy Spirit (the mind of Christ) who resides in all believers.
Non – Christians may have a “relationship” with God but it is temporary and not one which will ultimately be realized and fulfilled. Jesus is at the centre of the one and only lasting relationship with our Creator.
posted on February 1, 2012 in Letters
I was glad to see that our General Assembly confirmed its support for Israel and our acceptance of Jews. However, in the August issue of Israel & Christians Today I read of the World Council of Churches declaring the Jewish State “a sin,” and reaffirming “replacement” theology at their recent conference in Volos, Greece, and condemned Israel’s stand against the Palestinians. Were we Presbyterians a part of that? The article I read appalls me, if as a Christian church we are denying Israel’s right to exist. Can someone clarify this for me?
Editor’s reply: First, one has to realize that the publication is a lobbying instrument of Christians for Israel International, a Dutch – based Christian – Zionist organization. Many of its beliefs are incompatible with those of the Presbyterian Church in Canada.
Secondly, the article in question is not fair news reporting, it is a polemic. The accompanying unidentified photo of a man looking at swastikas has absolutely nothing to do with the Volos conference. It also deliberately misquotes. Neither the WCC nor the conference declared Israel a sin. The WCC does regard the occupation of Palestine as a sin. That is no doubt a controversial position, but hugely different than the allegation. As for replacement theology, there is no evidence of this. The word “chosen” does not even appear in the conference report.
If you are interested in finding out more, you may find the following websites helpful:
The World Council of Churches’ policy on Palestine/Israel (in brief)
The main page for the WCC’s Palestine Israel Ecumenical Forum
The website of the Kairos Palestine Document, which was created by Palestinian Christians and has caused much discussion in the Presbyterian Church in Canada.
The PCC’s official response to the Kairos Palestine Document, which was endorsed at the 2011 General Assembly.
And the PCC’s statement on our relationship with the Jewish people, also adopted at the 2011 assembly.
posted on February 1, 2012 in Letters
Questions about Christ Alone , by Kent Corbett, Campbellville, Ont.
Questions about Christ Alone-3, by John Vaudry, Pembroke, Ont.
Thank You, Faiz, by Terry Samuel, Kincardine, Ont.
Mary’s “Yes”, by Marion Da Silva
Questions about Christ Alone-4, by Bud Craig , Ottawa
Confused about Israel, by Nan St. Louis, Mount Forest, Ont.
Questions about Christ Alone-2, by Darren May, Stayner, Ont.
posted on February 1, 2012 in Letters
Re Theology 101, December
r. Dorcas Gordon’s perspective on “Christ Alone” was nothing short of awkward. The flaw in her argument is that she assumes universal truth changes in different contexts. A Christian worldview would suggest that Christ is the truth personified, the only way to God, and thus, Christ alone is Lord and King of his Church.
Sadly, the smugness Dr. Gordon refers to reflects people who embrace a healthy orthodoxy. It is not by smugness that we trust in the doctrine of Christ alone; it is with humble reverence that we can even approach the God of this universe who revealed His mind to all people through the Holy Scriptures. How is it possible to have a doctrine of God completely shrouded in mystery when we have a text so exhaustive of what God is willing to reveal to us?
Dr. Gordon correctly notes that the religious climate in Canada is changing and we are beginning to see it in congregational life. We must also note that this is in a denomination that is on the decline. Within this denomination, I am not threatened to proclaim or examine the doctrine of Christ alone. But when the Presbyterian Church dies because Christ alone is replaced by contextual relevance, and when enrollment in our seminaries peters out because of contextual relevance; maybe some folk will be forced to admit that some truth is universal. God will still be God, Christ will still be the only way to the Father.
If all Christ alone means is living gospel values focused on love and acceptance, then we are also proclaiming works righteousness. Christ alone means risking our lives under the blood of the one true lamb of God, who takes away the sin of the world. Without this truth, we have no hope to live by and no hope to offer. How ironic that this article arrived in week one of Advent, the week of hope!
Yours in Christ (& Christ alone),
posted on January 1, 2012 in Letters
Not the Sins of Sunday School, by W. Duthie, Aurora, Ont.
Respect the Back Rows, by Dorothy MacLellan, Thorburn, N.S.
Thank You! , by Janet Clapp, Winchester, Ont
Snubbing Secularism , by George Manson, Grand Forks, B.C.
Dig Deeper , by Mark Ward, Dunnville, Ont.
Sola Scriptura, November, by Elaine and Gordon Lovatt, Winnipeg
posted on January 1, 2012 in Letters
Re Beyond Sunday School Faith, November
Although I’m sure it was inadvertent, your editorial came across as a disservice to Sunday school. I don’t subscribe to the Jesuits’ Counter – Reformation approach of ‘Give me the child and the church will get the man,’ but Sunday school does meet a vital need of children and so of Christianity. I recollect enjoying the stories about the Old Testament warriors but the stories about Jesus were different. Probably because we were told and shown how Jesus, like our parents, cared for us. See, this we could easily relate to because a child’s whole life rotates around the love of his or her parents and this is the real point of Sunday school. A child can grow up to be straight and honest without algebra or geography but not without love. For me in recollection, Sunday school did the job, although I didn’t understand this at the time and didn’t need to. It is true that the young child doesn’t pass Christianity through a rational filter—thank the Good Lord! You conclude from this that most Christians believe that they learned all they need to know about Christianity in Sunday school and make no further attempt to grow in faith. But even if this were true, which I doubt, it isn’t the lack of theology or of rational thinking that makes us “rail in ignorance against a perceived evil,” which lack you seem to think is the hallmark of today’s fundamentalists. It was inquisitors trained in theology at universities who burned women at the stake over 400 years ago.
You quote St. Paul about childhood but Paul also said to the Corinthians “Where is the one who is wise? … Has not God made foolish the wisdom of the world?” Unless Paul is contradicting himself, I think he was referring in the first to the need for people to mature from being self – centred like a child, to extending love outside of themselves. In the second he was taking aim at Greek philosophy. Later, this did became a platform for Christian theology—St. Augustine held Plato’s idealism in high regard while St. Thomas Aquinas favoured Aristotle and Neoplatonism. This philosophy was woven into Christian theology and remains today in Roman Catholic, Anglican and Reformed teaching.
This determination to prove the truth of Christianity by reason led to further development of the “fissure over leaders (Peter, Paul, Apollos, Jesus)” that you cite, into that of numbers of different communities of faith in the early church cited by Dr. Thomson on page 18.
How then is the secular liberal democratic world to be reconciled to Christianity in our post – Enlightenment day? Thomas Jefferson thought he had found the answer with his famous or infamous scissors, Bishop Shelby Spong in his sins of the scriptures and Marcus Borg in his condemnation of the narrow beliefs of the fundamentalists. Each of these, by passing Christianity through the filter of post – Enlightenment reason, ended up with a pale, anemic Jesus irreconcilable to Jesus of the gospels and with a god reduced to a notion in deism.
As a footnote, you ask what it was like for Mary and Joseph and the shepherds. For Joseph and the shepherds this would be mere self – serving speculation because of the lack of hard data. The Church did more than speculate about Mary and its conclusions remain with us in Orthodox and Roman Catholic doctrine. Mel Gibson tried to speculate about Mary and brought nothing on himself but grief from many quarters. I think it is admirable to “reflect … on our faith …” but if this is equated to rationalizing our faith to conform to today’s secular liberal democracy, then look out for confusion! I prefer Jesus’ solution of “render unto Caesar …”
The polestar of Christianity is in Jesus who said: “whoever does not receive the kingdom of God as a little child will never enter it” (Mark 10:15). Obviously, he isn’t telling us to remain a child but he is saying after you have reached the kingdom by experiencing the love and compassion of God, he will show you how to use your intellect and reason. I live by that and I’m still able to take advantage of the fruits of the God – given scientific method, both materially and intellectually, while hopefully at the same time recognizing its pitfalls.
So Mr. Editor, the problem Christianity has in this secular humanistic world of ours is not attributable to the sins of Sunday school—you will have to look elsewhere.
posted on January 1, 2012 in Letters
Re Pontius Puddle, November
While reading the November issue, I could not find the humour in the Pontius Puddle comic. It has a pastor quipping that the back row of his church is filled with life forms that have “long since been fossilized and inactive.” It seems to me the back rows of most Presbyterian churches are filled with life forms whose work and dedication and faith are the cornerstone of all our activities. I know this is just a two – block comic strip but I think the back rows of our churches deserve more respect from the Record.
posted on January 1, 2012 in Letters
Re We Must Share Our Stories, Letters, December
Just a quick note to say thank you for publishing my letter in the December issue. I love the way this magazine connects us across our wonderful country and indeed throughout the world.
A woman named Kit (Hunt) Scott whom I met in 1969 (that’s 42 years ago!) saw my letter and reconnected with me. How nice is that?!
We both lived in Clinton, Ont., at the time and she is now a member at St. Andrew’s, Fergus, Ont., while I am in Winchester. When she saw my letter she wrote me and we have now connected and have been able to share our “hyphen” or “dash” with each other. Hopefully we’ll get to see each other in the coming year. I just wanted to express my gratitude for facilitating this reunion.
posted on January 1, 2012 in Letters
It is puzzling to me how, on the inside front page advertisement calling for readers to provide gift subscriptions of the Record, you would call it a “holiday gift” rather than a “Christmas gift.”
Certainly a bona fide Christian publication should not fall into the trap of secularism and political correctness during this Christmas season.
posted on January 1, 2012 in Letters
Re Good News at PWS&D, News, November
The November issue of the Record had a number of excellent articles, and I’m not just saying that because of Nicole Reid’s article on The Year of the Bible! Thank you.
But I was a little nervous to read at the bottom of the article about PWS&D that material in it had come partly from the Prime Minister of Canada’s website. My favourite commentator on international issues is Robert Fisk of The Independent. He complains often about the tendency for news organizations to rely on government spokespeople as they provide “information” to the public about such events as wars. Fisk warns that governments have all sorts of agendas besides informing us of what’s really going on.
I appreciate that the Record is not in a position to send people very far in quest of the “real story” behind our government’s promises about foreign aid. It might be good to do (and maybe you have done) a bit of checking on, for example, how much of that promised $1.1 billion is “new money” and what assurances there are that the money will actually go where it has been promised.
Editor responds: Agreed, Mr. Ward. But in this case, since the details surrounding the announcement from CIDA had not yet been set in stone, neither the government or PWS&D would say anything other than what was found on the PMO’s website. Once the details are finalized and released, we will carry an update in our news section, with further information and comment.
posted on January 1, 2012 in Letters
Re Sola Scriptura, November
In an otherwise excellent feature, we were very disappointed with the use of the abbreviation CE in Theology 101 in the November issue.
Why was AD (Anno Domini) not used in the article?
We suggest the Presbyterian Church in Canada adopt a policy of using AD whenever historical dates are needed along with BC for earlier years.
posted on December 1, 2011 in Letters
Re Sad, Disappointed, Hopeful; Letters, July/August
Whenever I read a letter to the editor regarding the matter of homosexuality, such as the one by Mr. Paul Kokoski in the July/August issue, I am dismayed and also very saddened to learn that there are still people in the Presbyterian Church who prefer to quote ancient biblical texts regarding homosexuality rather than understand that a person does not choose to be gay. This is a fact that the medical community, in particular those in psychiatry, has finally come to understand and accept, no longer considering homosexuality to be reversible.
It would certainly be constructive if such persons as Rev. Calvin Brown, Rev. Laurence DeWolfe, Rev. Glen Davis, the current moderator and others would write articles about this important matter in a more open manner. God will help us all to do what is right and to not be fearful of opening our minds to the truth. Let us ask ourselves, “What would Jesus say?”
posted on December 1, 2011 in Letters
Re: Storytelling People, October
I absolutely loved David Webber’s article, Storytelling People; and because I always read the Presbyterian Record from front to back, I did not miss this last article in the October issue. I truly believe that if we share more of our stories with others about how God was present in our lives, about what happened when we turned our lives over to God, etc. etc., it might have a big impact on those around us and who knows? This might even prompt them to want to come and worship with us! So let’s share what I call our “God Stuff!” And we need to remember, it doesn’t have to be earth shattering. Knowing that God cares about the small things is also reaffirming. Thanks for this good reminder of how important it is to share our dash or hyphen.
posted on December 1, 2011 in Letters
Re We are Called to be Angels, October
David Harris is a very fine editor but I think he needs to learn more about the foundation of our Presbyterian faith by studying the writings of our own best theologians, such as William Klempa and Joseph McLelland. If he did, he would realize that “evangelism” is not the “dirty” word, but the term “evangelical” is. It has long been associated with conservative or fundamentalist Presbyterians, especially in the United States, and the word has widely narrow connotations.
To add insult to injury, the cover and story is illustrated by a neon “Jesus Saves” in the form of a cross. To me that does not represent the Presbyterian Church, rooted solidly in the Reformed tradition. The Record should have chosen the conversation between Norm Grant and Patrick Voo and used a garden tended by and reaching out to all kinds of people.
That was an excellent article and illustrates the true meaning of evangelism. And did you notice? Neither of these used the term “evangelical.” By calling the Record an “evangelical” magazine, Harris just put us all back into a very narrow and confining box.
posted on December 1, 2011 in Letters
I realize that I’m challenging perhaps the most profoundly entrenched societal institution ever faithfully practiced by humanity, but, really, why do so many (fortunate) people every year give thanks to God “for the bounty we are about to receive,” all the while a few billion equally deserving folk around the world do not get to receive such bounty? Instead, they receive excruciating hunger pains and/or disease. Collectively, and sadly, so many people believe that God would bless “us” while neglecting “them.”
I do not at all believe that God does not care about His creation and especially the suffering that infests countless people within; I believe He’s allowing humanity what we so crave, indeed insist upon: free will—choice—as did Adam and Eve (whether literal or metaphorical), who chose to eat the fruit from the Tree of Knowledge of Good and Evil.
I perceive humanity, and our often tragic status, as harvesting the bitter produce of its own collective doing, even though innocent people, especially young children, too often unjustly share in the resultant suffering.
posted on December 1, 2011 in Letters
Re: Reclaiming Evangelism, October
How refreshing to see the cover story on evangelism. We sideline evangelism in our church life at our peril. The first words of Jesus’ ministry were ardently evangelistic and unavoidably personal: “The Kingdom of God is near! Turn from your sins and believe the Good News.” (Mark 1:15) This message remained at the core of Jesus’ teaching whether he was speaking to a Pharisee or the woman caught in adultery. We have neglected it.
As one who was much involved in congregational evangelism, I was once invited by one of our seminary lecturers to provide some input into a course on evangelism he was going to teach. I put together several pages of material. He replied, “Sorry, but the course is on the history of evangelism.”
Why has the Presbyterian Church in Canada so deliberately abandoned its spiritual “nursery?” Why are there so few conversions among us? One reason may be that too many have believed that spiritually empty cliché: show the love of Jesus and if necessary use words. Jesus showed love in healing many people. And they all died eventually. But those who took his words to heart, believed who he was and repented, would live again. This is the part that is the Good News and we have sidelined it.
But our problem is not really about evangelism. It’s that we love Jesus too little. But then how can you love someone you do not know and how can you know someone you do not seek? Biblical preaching and teaching can awaken a spiritual hunger and turn comfortable religious people into seekers of the rule of Christ in their lives. We actually need to begin to fall in love with God. If we don’t really need to turn from our sins and turn to the Lord and love Him, why bother preaching? Nothing eternal is at stake!
I recall a young bank teller who had just received her engagement ring. She counted out my cash for me that day with such a flourish. She was hoping I would notice the ring and ask her about the one whom she had come to love.
I am so thankful for those who pressed home to me with some urgency the primary truths of the only gospel that saves. We have a gospel to be proud of in the PCC. We need to offer practical courses at a seminary level for students who love the Lord and the lost enough to want to learn some of the skills necessary for effective congregational evangelism. There is also a need to develop a group of people who can lead training workshops at a congregational level. It could be the very means the Lord uses to inject new life and new blood into the PCC.
