It was with considerable interest that I read First Female Moderator Faces a Church Without Walls (April). The Scottish moderator is clear that "a patriarchal, hierarchical system of church is ill disposed to reward the delicate and subtle qualities that make life a pleasure," her predecessors having all been males. That, of course, led automatically to John Knox and "the monstrous regiment."
I recently had major surgery with a lot of anxiety and concerns. When you have an operation you are not allowed to wear any jewellery. I have a necklace with a cross I always wear so I felt lost without it.
Although I was pleased to see a picture from the induction of Rev. D'Arcy Lade at Comox Valley, B.C., in your May People & Places, I feel that I need to point out an error in your comment about that event.
This letter is in response to Brand Power, Searching For Lost Presbyterians in the March issue. The Presbyterian Church in Canada will not find lost members as long as we keep striking them from our rolls. Where do you think they will go when they are ready to return to a church? It sure won't be a Presbyterian church. Many young people today are active in many places doing good where they can. Many of the people are still dedicated Christians and doing the Lord's work in their own quiet way. Possibly when their lives are less stressed they will return to a church with many good years left to serve. Once a child is baptized we cannot undo their baptism, likewise we cannot undo the profession of faith between them and their God.
I am writing to thank the Record and Amy Cameron for an excellent article on parish nursing in March. However, I would like to make one correction. The article stated that parish nursing began in Canada "as early as 1992". In actual fact, Barbara Caiger, RN, began her role as a "nurse in a church" (parish nurse) at Holy Trinity Anglican Church, Thornhill, Ont., in 1988. It was close to the time that the Reverend Granger Westburg started to develop his concept of parish nursing in the United States and well before any word of it had strayed north of the border. Barbara Gaiger served in this role from 1988 until her retirement at the end of 2003. She is currently completing a book that comprises her collected wisdom from this experience. It will be available in the next few months, and is a valuable resource for anyone interested in this ministry.
Moffatt's blanket statement that "Christian fundamentalists consistently declare the virtue of human tolerance a sin" is hurtful. Perhaps if the words were to read "human tolerance of sin is a virtue" it would be more palatable to Moffatt, but hardly Reformed teaching which she would like us to believe she espouses.
I read with interest Rick Fee's article The Nigeria Factor in February.
As a former professor at Knox College I would like to build on Clive Ervine's article in May. Firstly there should be a constant updating of theology and biblical interpretation to reflect not just what the professor believes and has studied but also the different opinions that are currently being expressed in these disciplines. It is important students realize that people in their congregation are reading books by Bishop John Spong, Walter Wink, Marcus Borg and the writers of the Jesus Seminars. Usually, only people in the congregation with the professional training to lead these groups are the minister and a fortunate congregation that has a diaconal minister as well. But they need to go on learning in order to help others to learn.
Not often do I read a magazine cover to cover in one sitting but I did with the May Record. Congratulations on a really terrific issue. I'm especially interested in the cover story on Fair Trade as I have family in Zambia who are Fair Trade honey producers. Despite the decline in readership, the Record continues to be a must read in my household and I appreciate that there is room for a wide range of voices to be heard on a wide range of issues. It's a slippery slope to intolerance: should we want just one point of view represented? Congrats on a terrific issue and I look forward to rereading the articles at a more leisurely pace throughout the month!
As a seasoned East African expatriate I would like to share some background on coffee with your readers.
As the retired wife of our retired clergy, it was with rising indignation that I read the news of the raises for executive staff and professors as outlined in March. In conversations with other such wives, I know that they share my feelings, and they have encouraged me to write this letter.
I urge all to send a letter to their MPs in response to the Prime Minister's introduction of same-sex marriage legislation. This is not a human rights issue or a Charter of Rights issue: this is a God centered issue. If we believe God's Word then we accept His benchmark. These beautiful verses in Genesis are there to be accepted or rejected. As Canada grapples with this legislation, let's remember that we are called to be His witnesses. We are called to speak in love.
We write to clarify some points in the March Record concerning executive and professorial stipends.
I want to thank Amy Cameron for her article on parish nursing in the March issue.
In the February issue of the Record I was quoted as saying: "What parents want their child in Boy Scouts when the leader hasn't been screened?" Neither the reporter nor I meant this as a slur against Scouts Canada, but it would, in hindsight, have been more accurate to say, "What parents would want their child in a community group if the leader hasn't been screened?"
An article in the February issue regarding the church's Leading With Care initiative was very interesting and informative. However, Dorothy Henderson's quote is susceptible to a misreading that might lead one to believe that Scouts Canada does not screen its leaders, but rather leaves that responsibility to the church. Scouts Canada has had a rigorous volunteer screening policy in place since 1997 that includes police records checks, interviews and reference checks. This process is mandatory for all volunteers and is conducted independently from our partners/sponsors, including the Presbyterian Church.
It appears Michael Coren struck a nerve with the self-styled moderates. His article was bang on and it was proven a few pages later by the Faiz hypocritical attack on the Christian Right. Whether the intolerance is from secular or Christian left wing it's still intolerance. The squeals of outrage by Coren's critics demonstrate how deep the denial among the liberal left really is.
Congratulations to Andrew Faiz on pointing out the imbalanced agenda of those he terms "the Christian Right." Indeed, Jesus' concern extends far beyond sexual issues into the realms of justice, equality and integrity. It is interesting, however, to read Faiz alongside Michael Coren's article calling for a less poisonous debate between the "left" and "right" in the media. Faiz gives a lovely example of the writing Coren describes as typical of the secular Left, albeit from a Christian. He interprets R. Schenck's reasonable statement on Evangelical values as "anti-abortion, …anti-homosexual, …anti- ecumenical and anti-multifaith world." Most of the article comes out as an angry critique of a caricature of the worst of the Christian Right, obscuring a good point made which I referred to above.
Despite greater public awareness surrounding sexual abuse, I was appalled to read in the March 2005 issue that some churches are still reluctant to implement programs that not only safeguard children but also the adults who are responsible for their care. I would point out to congregations who are concerned that complying with the stipulations will be too expensive to implement and enforce, that non-compliance may in the end be costlier, and not only in financial terms. Can we afford not to do everything in our power to ensure that children are safe in our churches? Everyone wants to believe their church is exempt and that it is not possible for sexual abuse to occur in their congregation. Pretending we are not vulnerable will not make this problem go away. I do not believe, as Rev. Peter Coutts writes "that we're boxing ourselves in with a policy that we're obligated to follow that could leave us vulnerable to insurance companies." Far better to be vulnerable to insurance companies than to sexual predators. I applaud the new safety measures and agree with David Harris's excellent editorial that "no one can rationally object to making the church a safer place for ministry".
Re: Child Poverty Truly Threatens The Family, January