logo

Letters
Cheers and Jeers

Do no harm
Thanks for the article on Bishop Whitaker's address (March/April). It has done a favor for dialogue by making every Christian aware of the need for integrity in their moral positions concerning the various issues before them.

I also appreciate Whitaker's reminder of Wesley's first General Rule: "Do no harm."

I'm grateful that the bishop makes us aware of similarities between how one sees our nation's foreign policy (presumably including the Iraq war) and how one views abortion. He's right: there's a moral inconsistency in being for killing in one instance and against it in another.

While it's dangerous to generalize about people and their positions, for the most part I've observed that those who oppose abortion are the ones who support the death penalty and the war. Whitaker seems to reverse this generalization-saying that those who oppose war often support abortion.

The bishop suggests that those who oppose our nation's policies in Iraq are afraid to speak out against abortion for fear they would be seen as supporting Republicans. Maybe the reverse suggestion also should be made: Anti-abortionists may be afraid to speak out against the war lest they be seen as giving "aid and comfort" to opponents of President Bush.

It's especially noteworthy that the article closes by affirming Wesley's rule, "Do no harm." No matter where one stands on the discredited excuses for attacking Iraq (WMD or links to al Qaeda), or where one stands on the value of having toppled a tyrant (although not the worst), I believe it's beyond question that we have violated the "Do no harm" rule. The administration's irresponsible lack of clear and effective planning for the stabilization and rebuilding of Iraq has contributed to devastating chaos and death for the people we went there to liberate. Without a doubt, that's violating Wesley's first rule of "Do no harm."

William A. McCartney
Delaware, Ohio

The abortion challenge
I was glad to see that Bishop Whitaker spoke at the "sanctity of life" worship service in Washington, D.C. supporting the right to life, saying the United Methodist Church can no longer support abortion-a horrible procedure.

The United Methodist Church lends its name to the "Religious Coalition for Reproductive Choice," an organization that supports abortion, along with some other organizations. Where were all the other bishops over these years? Where were the pastors? Where were the laity of the churches? We, too, have been silent and not opposing this horrible practice.

We need to look to Scripture, God's holy word. It says "do not kill"-that means a child in the womb of the mother. God's word is absolute-it means what it says. Mankind has no right to say it means something different. God said of Jeremiah, "I knew you when you were conceived in your mother's womb." He knows every child when it is in its mother's womb waiting to be born. This being true, we the church, or any other organization, have no right to destroy the child either in or out of the womb.

The church must stop supporting abortion. The Lord cannot bless us or the church unless we are obedient to his holy will.

Quoting Bishop Whitaker, "We cannot endorse a woman's right to abort an unborn child as a morally neutral decision because we understand that the child also has a right to live and the community has a responsibility to care for the child if the mother is unable to rear it."

I hope and pray that by the next General Conference or before, the church will have stopped supporting all abortions. God help us.

Howard Rugh
Creston, Ohio

Left-wing fundamentalism
When people refer to fundamentalists, they usually mean those on the far right wing of a religious body such as Christianity or Islam. But have you ever seen or heard a reference to left-wing fundamentalists?

The five fundamentals of conservative Protestant Christians were originally stated in the early twentieth century as a means of bringing unity to Christian churches that were being splintered by nineteenth century liberalism. The term "right-wing fundamentalists" usually suggests people believing pre-enlightenment, unscientific myths.

What we don't hear is that folks on the left or liberal side of Protestantism also have a set of core values and basic beliefs that could be called fundamentals. They are as strongly committed to upholding their beliefs as folks on the right.

What are those values of the left? High on the list are pluralism, inclusiveness, absence of absolutes, Jesus without Christ, no miracles, and a transcendent God. Will followers of the Jesus Seminar, including some of our bishops, renounce these core values and beliefs?

It appears that, with the wide gulf between the Right and Left, it would take giving up a lot on each side for there ever to be real unity in the "United" Methodist Church. Does anyone foresee that happening?

For now, if the term fundamentalist is used pejoratively of those who hold basic biblical beliefs, let's recognize that those on the far left are also bound to a set of fundamentals, and thus are "left-wing fundamentalists."

Dale D. Brown, retired
West Michigan Conference



Click here to send your response plus the title of this article to us at Good News.

Good News | 308 East Main St. | P.O. Box 150 | Wilmore, KY 40390 | 859-858-4661 | 1-800-487-7784
info@goodnewsmag.org
| About Us | ©2007 Good News magazine