The things deacons do
An article on the activity of the Rev. Sean Krausert on the front page of the October issue makes it quite clear that he is a permanent deacon. Yet the headline says, “Priest tackles harsh reality of poverty.”
Errors like this make the recognition of deacons as a full and equal order so difficult to achieve. The Rev. Sean Krausert is doing the things deacons do.
The Rev. Dr. Andrew Barlow (Deacon)
Not easy being human
As one born into the Church of England (although a Quaker for the last 40 years), I thank you for the humanity and good sense contained in your article about the Occupy Toronto camp on the doorstep of the Cathedral Church of St. James (Shantytown springs up next to cathedral, Nov. 3, 2011, anglicanjournal.com).
I’ve been following with interest the events around St. Paul’s [London protesters force St. Paul’s to close, Oct. 25, 2011, anglicanjournal.com]. I find that in my native church community, there is painful, honest, humble soul-searching going on, which must command respect and inspire hope.
It’s not easy being human; we manage it best when we recognize our common ground.
Margaret Clare Forde
While it’s true Jack Layton was a hard worker and admirable in both demeanour and intelligence, too much has been made of him [A man like Jack, Editorial, Oct. 2011, p. 4]. In the federal arena, his fiscally unworkable platform was never put to the test. Politicians with boring platforms are the best at handling taxpayers’ dollars effectively, rather than those who promise, “You’ll get this and you’ll get that.”
Jack’s feet were definitely planted in the secular world. He leaned against the monarchy (the governor of our church), and was not a welcoming man if you opposed his views. An editor of a newspaper for the faithful, you should not canonize a man with little need for worship. Nevertheless, it is sad to see him leave us so soon.
I was completely horrified to read the piece by Harold Munn stating that “No matter what we do to the planet, it will not have the slightest impact on the love and power of God, which we know through the magnificence of creation.” [View from the pew, Oct. 2011, p. 11].
He sounds exactly like the children in elementary school who think that as long as they say they’re sorry, they can escape consequences. God loves us, yes; but it is beyond the pale to suggest that it’s fine with God if we destroy creation. It’s no wonder so many people who care deeply for the earth aren’t in church. I suggest Canon Munn re-read Job, Deuteronomy and Revelation 11:18.
Long way to go
As soon as I read, “No matter what we do to the planet, it will not have the slightest impact on the love and power of God” [View from the pew, Oct. 2011, p. 11], I got mad. Huh?
For me, the planet, and all of His creation, is God. Are we not stewards of “this fragile earth, our island home?” The author tells us he’s now living in the blessed state of retirement and, I would add, in a state of blessed ignorance. We have a long way to go.
Was that rabbi Jewish?
The Special Report on the Military Chaplaincy [Oct. 2011] was a nice addition to the Journal. However, there were articles that made mention of Jewish rabbis. What other kind of rabbis are there? Same with Islamic imams.
The comment about no weapons training bothers me. Yes, chaplains do not carry weapons, and that’s a good thing. But if I am called to attend to someone who is suicidal and who has a gun, I would to like to know how to unload it and make it safe.
Major (retired) C. Massey
More about money
Thank you, Michael Pollesel, for reminding me that the money should stay on the Table [Should we leave the money on the table? Sept. 2011, p. 7].
Of course that’s where it has to be. This is not merely given to pay the bills or repair the building. It is symbolic of our work and our play; our concerns, interests and passions. It represents the best in us and the worst in us. It is the faith community in miniature. It is, in a very real sense, representative of our lives. And we offer it “… and present to you ourselves….” It is an inadequate offering, but it is our best, and in it we are trying to say to God, “This is how much we love you.”
The offering on the Table demands that I examine what I am offering in a new light. I can no longer think of my offering in terms of the needs of the church but much more of my need to give and of my need to make a response to what God gives.
Archbishop Douglas Hambidge