Clerical collar comments

A letter in a recent issue of the magazine referred to the fact that ministers nowadays seldom wear clerical collars,certainly when “off duty” but also frequently in church.

I am an old man and therefore by definition a dinosaur, but there are many others who share my views.

Presumably the reason is that ministers wish to appear more ordinary and approachable to other people. If that is the reason then it is a failure. There is no detectable desire for the minister to be just “one of the boys” however friendly he or she is to us and with us.

There are two main points. One is respect towards the congregation who have probably at least put on fairly smart clothes to go to worship God and to and serve in church and meet other people and secondly, and much more importantly, to worship God, not in an offhand casual way but to regard it as a privilege to have the welcome duty of leading a congregation in prayer.

A more formal approach might well succeed in gathering more numbers and respect where the present apparently casual way is manifestly failing.

Robert Robinson, Glasgow

Further to the above letter in the October edition of Life and Work (‘Clerical Collar Debate’) I would respond by saying: ‘Well spoken Margaret. My sentiments entirely.’

William A Simpson, Motherwell

Gospel Debate

In the October issue of Life and Work I have just read Professor Hume’s response to the letter by Mr Alex Glen in the August issue.

I must admit that I too was saddened, not by the assertion of the Gospel by Mr Glen, but rather by Professor Hume’s remarks.

He acknowledges that Mr Glen’s view “has long been held by much of the Church”. He is therefore suggesting that Mr Glen is in error and that “much of the Church” has been deluded for many centuries.

Professor Hume refers to ‘other interpretations’ and even outlines the idea that Jesus came to ‘challenge Judaic orthodoxy’. To suggest that the death of Christ can be attributed to a political dispute with the ‘religious establishment in Jerusalem’ and was a result of His challenge to Judaic orthodoxy, is to trivialise and to demean the greatest Gift God has given to Mankind.

By contrast, John the Baptist proclaimed: “Behold the Lamb of God who takes away the sin of the world” (John 1:29) The very term “lamb of God” in this context surely echoes and implies atonement through sacrifice.

As Professor Hume suggests “this is not the place to develop a detailed theological argument” but the Gospel of Jesus is not in essence a matter of theological argument nor is it merely a matter of interpretation. It is a matter of faith.

The Gospel, as clearly defined in Mr Glen’s letter, is to be received by faith and that faith is the gift of God. It is a spring of gladness, not sadness, that “God, so loved the world that He gave His one and only Son that whoever believes in Him shall not perish but have eternal life”

George L Chalmers (Glasgow)

It was with great interest that I read the letters entitled ‘Gospel Debate’ in the October issue of Life and Work.

It seems to me that while some churches emphasise one aspect of faith, other churches emphasise something else. Neither can be inaccurate, but maybe we should take into account the whole narrative of the Bible – God’s wonderful world, humans put into it to look after it, Israel, God’s chosen people making a mess of it, rebellion and restoration, the whole story reaching a climax in the life, death and resurrection of Jesus.

It seems that God was putting his world ‘back on track’ showing people a better way of being human by the life of Jesus. We say the creed: ‘born of the virgin Mary, crucified, dead… rose again.’ What about the bit in between the birth and death/resurrection? Did it not matter? Many people today aren’t thinking about sin and salvation, but they’re searching for meaning in life – work, eat, sleep, reproduce, work, eat… what’s the point of it all?

Let’s be clear. The relationship each one of us has with God is important. We also belive that God will look after his people following their deaths. But surely, there is much more than this?

On the other hand, faith must not just become good advice and good morals (although there’s plenty of that in scripture). The kingdom which Jesus inaugurated could only be firmly established through his death and resurrection.

For many years Christians have assumed that the main point in Jesus’ death was ‘to save us from our sins’. But surely the rescue and restoration of individuals has a larger purpose – the purpose of the kingdom, the kingdom being God’s rule on earth. We know from what Jesus said and did that it’s a different kind of kingdom which can only be established by love and suffering. The kingdom and the cross belong together. Jesus’ followers are called to put the kingdom into effect by announcing Jesus as Lord and calling people to believe in him and to know his rescuing power in their own lives. Surely this is the whole Gospel. The meaning of life? ‘Saved to serve?’

Dororthy Mackay, Aberdeen

In Arthur Conan Doyle’s tale “ The Land of Mist”, Doyle has his character Miromar say that the dark cloud of theology has come between mankind and God.

Maybe there’s much truth in that, maybe over the centuries theologians have so changed the message Jesus came to deliver that its simplicity has been all but lost. And if cruelty and schism have marked their passing here, what mischief theologians brought upon Christ’s church.

Furthermore who’s to say that Paul the apostle rightly understood in every point the things of God, or Luther or Calvin for that matter? If that were so they’d be gods, not men. And who’s to say the Westminster Confession in all things accurately reflects the mind of God?

In that regard your correspondents John Hume and Graham Hellier, both querying the substitutionary atonement theory, had excellent letters in Life and Work’s October issue.

Maybe the late Sydney Carter had understanding in these things. In his hymn Lord of the Dance he has Jesus saying: “I’ll live in you if you’ll live in me”, and which simple route to intimacy with God our Father would seem to well agree with what Jesus said in the gospels.

Keith Fernie, Inverness

History Thoughts

In Life and Work, (September) the Very Rev Dr James Simpson wrote: “The mailed fist of the Roman Empire was set on destroying the early church.”

In fact the rapid spread of Christianity was made possible by the Roman Empire’s efficiency and communication systems. Over 30 years, Paul clocked up around 10,000 miles, preaching in some of its most important cities. Nero’s persecution of the new Christian sect was brief and was not repeated in other parts of the empire. The Christian church and faith grew rapidly until it became the Empire’s official religion.

Rome tolerated all religious traditions that were not actively seditious. Sadly as soon as the Empire became Christian this toleration ceased. Today we are horrified by the cultural destruction wreaked by Isis but that pales into insignificance compared to the wholesale obliteration of pagan literature, art and architecture carried out by Christian iconoclasts.

Dr John Cameron (Rev), St Andrews

Word and Action

Recently, my church had the honour of hosting a reception for the Moderator of the General Assembly at the end of his visit to Glasgow Presbytery. A few months ago, we lost our minister as fallout from the trend of General Assemblies to swerve away from Biblical teaching. Whilst our remaining members share that concern, we feel led by God to stay and work on to present the hope in Christ to the thousands of students and tourists on our doorstep, through faithfulness to the Bible.

Dr Browning brought us encouragement in his greeting, citing how Jesus had brought assurance to His disciples as He walked across Lake Galilee. They were experiencing something well outside their comfort zone and had attendant concerns. He shared with us how observations in his visits show that the churches that are thriving in these days of general decline are those that are reaching out and looking to be relevant to those around them.

Cartoon: Bill McArthur

This was complemented by our preacher during the service who warned of the dangers of God’s people prescribing their own methods for God’s work and failing to rely on the One Who knows best. In 1 Samuel, we read that God’s people demanded a king (Saul), just like all the other nations, but it backfired. We need to be relevant to those around us indeed, and this may require changes in means of presentation as well as our activities. However, we must show the Way to the world, and only faithfulness to the Bible will ensure that we do that correctly. Sometimes, we need to be quite different to the mainstream.

We labour on, seeking God to bring us into a new chapter of service both as a congregation and as part of a church that can serve Scotland and the wider world as well by bringing the Gospel to it in word and consequent action.

Harry Laird, Glasgow

Life and Work welcomes letters from readers of not more than 350 wordswhich can be sent by post to Life and Work,121 George Street, Edinburgh, EH2 4YN or by email to magazine@lifeandwork.org

For verification purposes letters must be accompanied by the writer’s name, address and day time telephone number. Anonymous letters will not be published. In exceptional circumstances the Editor will consider publishing a letter withholding the details of the writer, provided verification can be made. The Editor reserves the right to edit letters for space and legal reasons.