Priestly Robes to Torn Jeans - Christians and Dress

Okay, I am going to weigh in on this topic, even though I suspect many of you will disagree with me. Some might think, yes, that is just an old man talking. To that I say, most of you don't know how I dressed in the 60s, and if you know anything about the 60s, you know there were some big changes in what young people wore then. I can remember cutting nice big triangular wedges out of my worn out red “Brian Jones pants,” as some people called them, and inserting them into the lower legs of my slim blue jeans to turn them into nicely flared bellbottoms. LOL.

And believe you me, there were lots of older folk who didn't like how we dressed then. That's when people started doing things like wearing jeans to church, which was one line I did not cross, even then. Now I know some of you might be thinking, God is no judge of persons and he accepts everyone, no matter what they wear. To that I say, this is not about God, it is about us.

God does not need us. He created us because of the love which made him want to show his love to us.  Remember, love lives in freedom.

However, God does have standards, and we know that. Look at the Old Testament. God gave us detailed descriptions about what those who entered the sacred parts of the tent/Tabernacle and then Temple were to wear and even limiting those individuals to those who had no physical defects. That was not because God had something against that. Well, yes, perhaps he did, in that it reminded him of what his former angel Satan had done to his beloved good creation. More to the point though, I think it was to remind us that in God's perfect world, we are perfect, and having more perfect people with better dress enter the sanctuary reminds us of what it would be like in God's kingdom. Some of you may also be saying, but that was dress for the priests. Yes, but the New Testament teaches that we are all priests, representatives of God.  That is something we especially as Anabaptists and Mennonites believe.

So, coming back to dress, particularly what we wear when we attend “church.”  Some of you who have been in discussions about this will probably have heard the question, What would you wear if you were invited to have an audience with The Prime Minister, The Governor General or even The Queen?  Yes, I think there have been some of those - was it Justin Bieber? - who wore things like torn jeans on such an occasion, but is he our model?

Seriously though, what is appropriate to wear in the presence of our Maker, given what we have already said?  I think there is another aspect to this that bears bringing into the discussion.  What message are we giving nowadays, and to whom, when we wear sort of ragged looking clothing in public and even to church?  Are we saying that is all we can afford? Indeed, that is part of the issue. Some of you may know that there is a whole segment of the fashion industry that is devoted to designing clothes that look like they might have been worn by homeless and street people. Now what kind of respect for them is that? Most of them would probably love to dress a little better and here we have an industry making and charging exorbitant prices for clothes that look like castoffs that the homeless and street people have to wear. If we look at it this way, I think we are being disrespectful and do a disservice to our poorer neighbors by wearing ragged looking clothes when we can afford better.

I could say more about other ways in which we dress, but this is enough for now. But think about it - we are priests representing the King of Kings and Lord of Lords. How did and does he dress??? 

The Apostle Paul and Women - What Romans 15 Might Be Telling Us

As I may have mentioned in other blog entries, our congregation is reading through the Bible this year; well, at least some of us have accepted the challenge made some 11 months ago. This week I finished reading the Letter to the Romans. I was struck anew by all the references to women in the last chapter.

As many readers might well know, the apostle Paul has often gotten, as some would say nowadays, “a bad rap” when it comes to some of the things she has said about women. However, as is often the case, it is often more prudent to look at what a person does then what person says. If we take note of the references to women in the acts, which recounts Paul's so-called "missionary journeys,” we will see favourable references to women. You will actually see similar statements and some of his other letters, besides the Letter to the Romans.

But since we are now reading Romans in our congregation, let us take a look at the last chapter. Has seems to have been more of a custom in those days and then now, bearing in mind of course that Paul was writing to her group and not always an individual, at the ends of the letters, there are often a lot of things which should include references to how this person has figured in  the writer's, in this case Paul’s, life.

It is obvious from the way the book is written, even before the later insertion of chapter divisions, that they content of the letter was finished at the end of chapter 15. Then, the first thing we read in chapter 16, which is the section on readings etc., is a reference to "our sister Phoebe,” a woman. She must have been a prominent enough woman for Paul to begin this whole greeting section with her. Indeed, the above phrase goes on to identify her as “a deaconess of the church at Cenchreae.”  Cenchreae was actually a Greek city, a seaport, near Corinth. “Here according to Acts 18:18, Paul had his hair shorn before sailing for Syria, since he had a vow. A local church must have been established there by Paul since Phoebe, the deaconess of Cenchreae, was entrusted with the Epistle to the Romans, and was commended to them in the highest terms by the apostle, who charged them to ‘assist her in whatsoever matter she may have need.’ " [http://biblehub.com/topical/c/cenchreae.htm]. 

We obviously have to balance this with other references where Paul speaks of women not being permitted to speak in the church (First Corinthians 14:33B-35). I don't think we can imagine that  Phoebe was not allowed to speak if she was a deaconess. At the same time though, the role of a deaconess, or elder as we might be more familiar with, was probably to serve in the community, which did not necessarily call for her to be given the right to speak in the  assembled congregation. As mentioned above as well though, Paul must have thought a lot of her to entrust her with the letter to the Romans, which he was probably sending from Corinth. One can deduce that from the letters to the Corinthians (second Corinthians 8:1-9:5) because there he speaks of going to Jerusalem with an offering from the church in Greece, in particular Macedonia, for the church in Jerusalem was suffering from a famine, which he also speaks about in Romans 14:25-29.  Here he speaks of wanting to go to Jerusalem with this gift, after which he hopes to finally be able to come to Rome.  Indeed, interestingly, this is the only letter we have in the New Testament written by Paul to a church which he had not previously visited, if not in fact started.

The next reference is To the couple, Prisca/Priscilla and Aquila, who we will recall had given Paul, a fellow tent-maker, hospitality when he arrived in Corinth and were instrumental in founding the church there (Acts 18:23C).  I don't want to put too much weight on the fact that Priscilla's name is first, but we know that even nowadays, unless one purposely names the woman first when listing, for example, a couple, I think the tradition in our still too-patriarchal society is to name the man first. So, again, this might tell us that Paul's memory and appreciation for this couple was more for what Priscilla did then what her husband Aquila did. 

Indeed, as we go through the names from verses 1-15, of which there are 30, a full one-third of them, it would seem to me, are clearly women.  There are probably just as many whose gender I could not be certain of, so there might even be more women named.

Interestingly, the fourth naming is Mary, whom Paul refers to as having worked hard among you, meaning the Romans. As we know, church lore has it that the Apostle Peter founded the church in Rome. There are also other stories to the effect that Jesus’ mother Mary worked with Peter and perhaps even Luke, who was with Paul when he eventually went to Rome, as we can see from the way he writes Acts in the first person when it talks about their journey to and stay in Rome. This is augmented by the fact that Paul referred to Luke as being a fellow worker with him in Rome, for example when he wrote the letter to Philemon (verse 23) and particularly second Timothy 4:11, where he describes being deserted by a number of people, Luke alone being left with references such as that in Philemon above, also ended up in Rome with Paul.

Other references that indicate Paul’s close affection for women are such as those in verse 13 where he says,”Greet Rufus, eminent in the Lord, also his mother and mine.” In verse 15 he greets Nereus and his sister. One might even speculate that Paul, living what appears to have been a celibate life as a missionary, in contradistinction to his evidently having been married once in the past, as this was a condition of being a Pharisee, which he was, appreciated especially the roles of women that ministered to him in his travels

Whatever one might want to make of all of this, one needs to recognize that, over against the place of women in Jewish society, let alone Gentile, they were already being given significantly more recognition and acceptance in the early church and in all of the New Testament writings then would have been warranted if the writers followed the mores of society at large in those days. 

Guilt

Aha, I caught your attention with that title did I not?

Will, this is a blog entry in which I am going to possibly be more personal than I have generally been or even ever have been in previous entries. Some might say that the fact that I would  Have these thoughts or write this represents my idealism because I am only doing what I wish more of us would do with each other, especially those of us who called each other Christians; that is, the more open with one another about a real thoughts, our fears our feelings etc.

I have wondered for years whether I am really guilty of spiritual laziness, if that is what I should call it. Simply put, I often wonder about things that I think maybe I could or should be doing as a Christian, but am not. I am not necessarily referring here to shirking responsibilities that others have assigned or that others depend on. However, I sometimes wonder what my Lord really thinks of me.

I have sometimes talked to others whose opinion I would value about this but have generally been simply reassured. Somehow, I still cannot accept that. I sometimes wonder whether we are all so entrenched in our Western, affluent, individualistic society, that we have long lost sight of the type of sacrificial living that the church sometimes promoted.

At other times I think, including when I read the Scriptures or some of the older hymns we sing, where we are enjoined to do things like fulfil the sufferings of Christ - what does that really mean for us in 21st-century America? Jesus was a unique individual like no one before him or after with a purpose that no one else will ever have. Is it then right to expect that we as Christians should fully follow his path? On the one hand, Jesus talked about taking up his cross and following him. He talked about selling all your goods and giving to the poor. He also pointed out to would-be followers that they might have to give up family connections. They should think about the fact that he was a person who had nowhere to lay his head at night.

On the other hand, Jesus talked about coming to bring abundant life. Now, I know that many of us agree that there are far too many, particularly in North America and especially among the more conservative evangelical segments of Christianity, that believe, as the Jews in Jesus day did, that this refers to being socially successful and materially prosperous. I don't accept that. We know that Jesus pointed out that being rich was not to be acquainted with having God’s blessing. I have had enough fulfilling experiences as a Christian to wonder whether the abundant life Jesus is really referring to is the joy and satisfaction that we can gain from devoting ourselves fully to what Christ wants us to do.

I look around me at many so-called good Christians, deeply spiritual people who serve their church and community well. However, they also drive good cars and w cottages and live in houses beyond what I would ever build for myself or buy. Do they not have the kinds of questions I am talking about here?

These questions about what I am doing with my resources and time sometimes plague me when I'm doing things that I enjoy such as spending time on my photography, going on vacation or watching a movie. Now, of course, the society in which Jesus lived was totally different than ours and he never had to deal with these issues. I am sure he had different temptations though in terms of wanting to have a family, settle down and have a home.

Does Jesus really want us to spend our every waking hour either in prayer, Bible study, or some service or relational activity that would definitely be seen as part of the fulfilment of the great commandment of Matthew 28 to the church? Should we not have any hobbies, free time to enjoy things that we like doing, or vacations? To many of us, those are the kinds of things that help make our life seem more "full and abundant.” 

Then I look again at our Lord's life an example. I think about the fallen world we live in and how much there is to do in it to try to make it better. Then I wonder whether some of those things that I have described above that we in our modern Western world enjoy are really only the kinds of things we should let ourselves be prey to if the world was in a fully restored state. Perhaps these are the kinds of things we would've happily participated in if there was no sin in the world, if there had never been that “fall." However, now that the world is as it is, and we have a mission to do, do we not have other things to do than follow our own likes and pursuits? By continuing to do so, are we just showing our extreme selfishness? How can we sit playing games and enjoying the company of friends for an evening before retiring to our warm comfortable beds when there are millions in this world who don't even know what such a game is and who have nowhere to sleep but In great insecurity under the stars.

There is one other significant element to all of this that I have not even raised so far. That is the message that many of us have heard in our lifetime to the effect that as Christians, we are all too be involved in “winning souls for Christ.” As I look around at many of my fellow-believers, it does not seem that many of them are very actively involved in this. I do not see a lot of what I would call verbal witnessing going on. To be sure, I wonder if some of that is simply not from the spiritual culture that we have grown up in. As a Mennonite, descendent of those who endured severe persecution in the past, and so subsequently to some extent simply became, as we have often said, "die stille im land,” the “quiet in the land,” we just don't talk about our faith in everyday life the way we sometimes see others such as our Alliance or Pentecostal neighbours seemingly do. Even though my own parents were so-called full-time missionaries, their everyday talk was not peppered with references to Jesus or God or that they were doing this or that because of him. There was not a lot of talk about things happening because of God's will, whether we were doing God's will with choices we were making.

Now I know that many of my fellow-Christians do a reasonable job of introducing their families to Christianity. We sometimes talk about that as a growing the biological church. Of course, with our current birthrate, it would just be sustaining what we now have in terms of numbers. But we don't seem to do a lot of sharing our faith with people we meet in our work or leisure activities, let alone our family.

Ultimately, I have to look at myself about all of this. I cannot look at others for excuses. Am I simply afraid to speak out? When I was a child, I know that we suffered some significant teasing and negative behaviour, even physically assaultive on isolated occasions, because of our being part of the Evangelical Church versus the mainline Anglican or Catholic in our small northern community. I have had a couple of experiences of significant rebuffing of my attempts when I have tried to witness on occasion. Somehow, for most of my career, in spite of the fact that I believe God called me to it, I have ended up working in what might be called public service, where in our pluralistic society, one is not really allowed to speak about one’s faith, especially not in any way that might be construed as promoting it to those you serve, i.e. my patients. I have often wondered about the seeming contradiction in that. It is partly why in the past I did maintain a small private practice so I was more free to do that, although even their I have had colleagues receive admonishment from our licensing body because of faith-related issues that surfaced in their own private offices.

We know that we are called to a life of discipleship. Many of us do quite a reasonable job of that. But what about that aspect of bringing others to Christ? I know we are often reassured by leaders in our society that it is not a numbers game. But we are to do something are we not?

Well, I have here exposed some of my deepest and most agonizing questions. At the same time, I have always often wondered about this because I do not feel what to me would be a real sense of guilt about all of the above. Particularly as a psychiatrist, I know what guilt can do to people, leading to serious depression etc., and I have never been anywhere near that. Sometimes I wonder if it is because I am so far removed from where I should be as a Christian . Is my conscience so dulled? At other times I want to say that I can go on without this guilt because I know that is not really a feeling Jesus wants me to have. He knows our weakness   and he has still loved and forgiven us, as long as we have asked him for that. If that assurance of salvation and having received the gift of God's grace is pretty much all that I bring to the Lord on Judgment Day, along with what I have done in service, but with a pretty skimpy record when it comes to bringing others into the kingdom, what will be my sentence?

There are some indications in the New Testament that we will not all be judged equally. Does that mean that some of this will have a different level of reward in heaven? Do we just count on being there at least, even if it means having almost no “stars in our crown” versus others whose crowns would be laden with them?

Sometimes when I have these thoughts, I find it at least a little reassuring that even someone who we generally regard as highly as we do the Apostle St. Paul, that even he wrote, as recorded in Romans 7:15 “I do not understand my own actions. Why I do not do what I want, but I do the very thing I hate.… 17 so that it is no longer I that do it, but sin which dwells within me. For I know that nothing good dwells within me, that is, in my flesh. I can will what is right, but I cannot do it. For I do not do the good I want, but the evil I do not want is what I do. Now if I do what I do not want, it is no longer who do it, but sin which dwells within me.

21 so I find it to be a law that when I want to do right, evil lies close at hand. 22 For I delight in the law of God, in my inmost self, 23 but I see in my members another law at war with the law of my mind and making me captive to the law of sin which dwells in my members. 24 Wretched man that I am! Who will deliver me from this body of death? 25 Thanks be to God through Jesus Christ our Lord! So then, I myself serve the law of God with my mind, but with my flesh I serve the law of sin.”

No one has ever said it better than that. So, I think it is time I stop this somewhat disorganized rambling, which probably simply reflects my own unclear thoughts on the topic.

A PRIMER ON TAIWAN-CHINA RELATIONS

NOTE: Some of the information below, betrayed by the blue ink, is taken from various Wikipedia articles about the history of Taiwan, its political history and the history of the Kuomintang. 

The most recent news about Taiwan to hit Canadian headlines was President Ma Ying-jeou’s first (at least publicly acknowledged) meeting with Chinese President Xi Jinping in Singapore. We heard and read many comments in Western media about the possibly positive aspect of this signalling improving relations between the two nations. Note, I still said nations: China does not really even accept that Taiwan is an independent nation. Calling this positive reflects the West’s short term view of Taiwan’s history, at least when it comes to politics and international affairs.

For the West, Taiwan’s relevant history in these matters begins after World War II. Their ally in Asia, then President of the Republic of China formed back in 1911, was Chiang Kai-shek, as he is known here, of the ruling Kuomintang (KMT), or Chinese Nationalist Party. He, his army and supporters were running from the Communists and needed someplace to go. Japan, which had ruled Taiwan since 1895, had been defeated and expelled from Taiwan. Since there seemed to be a vacuum in Taiwan when it came to government, and there was some history of connection to China, our wise leaders at the time offered it to the Nationalists.  Ever since, the West (read mainly the US) has supported this government as part of its defence against Communist China. 

The history before 1895 can be summarized as follows. Taiwan was first inhabited by aborigines of which there were a number of tribes. The West began to appear on the island during their days of imperialism. Portuguese sailors, passing Taiwan in 1544, first named the island Ilha Formosa, meaning "Beautiful Island". The island was first colonized by the Dutch in the 17th century, followed by an influx of Han Chinese including Hakka immigrants from areas of Fujian/Fuchien and Guangdong/Canton of mainland China. Most of these were single men trying to escape from the brutality of warlord afflicted China and many ended up marrying local women.The Spanish also built a settlement in the North for a brief period, but were driven out by the Dutch in 1642.

In 1662, Koxinga, a loyalist of the Ming dynasty, which had lost control of mainland China in 1644, defeated the Dutch and established a base of operations on the island. His forces were defeated by the Qing dynasty in 1683, and parts of Taiwan became increasingly integrated into the Qing empire. Prior to the Japanese expansionist moves in the 19th century, China still was not that interested inTaiwan. The Chinese on the mainland had little regard for it and its inhabitants. They even tried to get the Chinese who had moved there to return to China. However, when skirmishes began with the Japanese, China began to bolster the defences in Taiwan and administer it as a province from 1885 onward. Following the First Sino-Japanese War in 1895, the Qing ceded the island to the Empire of Japan. By this time there were over 2 million Chinese on the island and some 200,000 aboriginals.

When it became apparent that Taiwan would become the haven of the Nationalist Party/KMT, Chiang began to send his soldiers in to subject the local population to their rule. In 1949 the KMT established the remnant of the Republic of China on Taiwanese soil and began a reign of terror over the local Chinese and aboriginals. Of course, revisionist history does not recount that. Instead, the previous immigrants, whom we hall subsequently refer to as Taiwanese, and the natives  were taught the history of mainland China. 

For the next 4 decades the ruling KMT and their supporters, whom we can refer to as ‘mainlanders,’ as the Taiwanese do, blustered on about returning to the mainland and regaining what they saw as their legitimate place as the rulers of China versus the Communists. They took over all the utilities and businesses, the public and civic places. All of this in spite of the fact that they only number about 15% of the population.

The Taiwanese who, in spite of the harshness of Japanese rule, came to appreciate many aspects of it and the increasing accoutrements of civilization the it afforded. Many went to be further educated in Japan and others fought for Japan in World War II. Indeed, when the Nationalists began pouring in, many of whom were single men from  backward areas of China, their lack of decorum and civility was quite abhorrent to the Taiwanese. 

The resentment of the Taiwanese against their KMT overlords and the martial law under which they ruled continued to grow as they became further educated abroad and imbued with ideas of democracy and freedom. They still remembered events such as the infamous 22-8 massacre and other cruelties inflicted on them by the KMT, who put any who opposed them in prison, often exiled offshore to remote Green Island, if they were not outrightly executed. This, coupled with relaxation of KMT control in the last decades of the 20th century led in 2000 to the election of the first non-KMT government. This government of the Democratic people’s party favoured independence from China with recognition of Taiwan as a nation by that name. However, the KMT, campaigning against alleged corruption of the DPP (the KMT should talk…), regained power in 2008. Better relations with China had been part of their platform now. Indeed, instead of maintaining their half-century-old stance of someday reconquering China the government under Ma Ying-jeou began to pass measure after measure to ‘improve’ relations to China. It began to look as though the erstwhile enemies of the Communist People’s Republic of China were preparing to simply hand Taiwan over to the Mainland under the right terms.

Many of the real Taiwanese (and we can include Hakka and other groups such as the aborigines here for the sake of simplicity), having no ‘history’ of their link to China, do not see why they should be sacrificed to a Communist country just because their homesick mainlander overlords want to reconnect. Their feelings about this were exemplified by how many chose to emigrate to places like Canada when there were worries about Taiwan being next when China reclaimed Hong Kong in 1997. Of course, many mainlanders also emigrated because of their fears of China. 

I see a parallel here between what happened between Europe and North America. Europeans came and took over North America from the aboriginals here, just like the Chinese did to their counterparts in Taiwan. But we, the US and then Canada, and indeed all of he Americas except for a few islands in the Caribbean, gained our independence from our colonial sources.  That is exactly what the Taiwanese aspire to. They are no happier with the flood of Chinese investors,  ill-behaved tourists and immigrants to their island because of the opening up of relations between the two governments than many of us are with the wave of mainland Chinese immigration here.

Yet, the West continues to think reunification is a good thing. They just want to see one less reason for armed conflict in the region spilling over to include themselves and Japan if war did break out between China and Taiwan. There have been conflicts in the past, most notably in the ;ate 1950s when Taiwan and China were shelling each other over offshore islands held by the Republic of China near coastal Xiamen, one of Richmond’s twin cities. To that end, it seems the poor Taiwanese are again going to be sacrificed forth presumed benefit of the West.  How many of us want to become part of the UK again, or France? I don’t think so. So why do we think it’s OK to let this happen to Taiwan?

TRICKSTERS, TRANSFORMERS, SHAPE-SHIFTERS AND BIBLE STORIES

Tricksters, transformers, shape shifters and BIBLE stories? Or my! What are we getting into here?

I have thought about some of these things as I have wondered about Bible stories and also been learning more native stories. There may be more similarities than you would think. Indeed, if we accept that there was one Creator God who made this earth and everything in it, we are starting off with something of a common denominator for all peoples. Is it not quite possible that he also appeared to and communicated with peoples other than those whose visitations are recorded in the Old and New Testament? I think we would have to be rather presumptuous to say no way.

Now I am talking here about first Nations mythology and the Bible. But there is one other component that also crossed my mind in thinking about these things. I have never read The Book of Mormon and do not claim to know much about that religion. However, it seems to me I have read that they do refer to First Nations peoples, possibly not only in North America but around the world, as having a special role in receiving supernatural visitations. Again, although we as Christians might be dismissive of many elements of the Mormon tradition, there are good parts to it too. Again, if you believe there is only one God, and therefore only one ultimate truth, parts of it may have filtered down in many ways to many peoples.

The Old Testament stories I am thinking about are particularly the ones involving Abraham and also his grandson Jacob. In a couple of the stories where Abraham is the human, we read of visitors that come to him to talk with him about future things and, and promise things such as the birth of a son. On another occasion they came to talk to him about the destruction of Sodom and Gomorrah.  These visitors are not specifically referred to as angels. In fact, they are more described as actually being God visiting Abraham. Indeed, who these visitors were has been the subject of speculation down through the ages. Some have thought that these were even visitations by Jesus prior to his becoming a human being. Some of the stories where Moses encounters the supernatural could also be considered here.

There is another key element in all of this that we need to address to give more weight to it all. That is the element of humour. All cultures include in their stories fantastical sides that really have humorous elements to them. Indeed, in many religious traditions, these are also still present. When it comes to Christianity, they are probably more evident in the Roman Catholic tradition than the Protestant. Just think about some of the goings on in relation to the many festivals that some of us are familiar with in the former tradition and  the stories and figures that go with them, e.g. Mardi Gras.

Somehow, in Protestantism and Anabaptism we seem to have lost that.  I think we can gain some understanding of how this came to be if we know what our spiritual forefathers were protesting against. The stories about figures in the Roman Catholic church tradition had become much too creative and magical.  There was more emphasis put on passing these traditions and associated rites on than seeing that Christianity was about a way of living, or discipleship, as our ancestors saw it. Anything to do with faith and living in the Christian path of discipleship became serious business. I am not sure we have a similar expression for this in the Mennonite tradition but you may have heard about “dour Scottish Presbyterians.”  Indeed, a colleague of mine remembers the gates of the local playground being locked on Sundays in his childhood Scotland. Talk about taking the Sabbath Day seriously.

For some reason, talking about God, Jesus and Christianity included no space for humour and laughter. But how could that happen? If we believe that God created everything, and as we often perhaps too glibly say, we are made in his image, where does our sense of humour come from? I don’t think we would be ready to say that it all comes from the devil. Even then, some could say Satan must have been created by God, but that’s another discussion.

I believe that our sense of humour does come from our Creator. It is just that in our seriousness about our faith we have tended to have a blind spot about where humour might fit in. Indigenous traditions are not troubled by that. I am most familiar with our First Nations traditions, even though my knowledge of them is quite limited. However, their legends, as alluded to above, are full of stories about all levels of beings playing tricks and exhibiting various aspects of humour. Clever creatures like the raven and sneaky animals like the coyotes are part of this.  Even the Walt Disney cartoons carried this on with their stories of humour enshrined in animals such as Wile E. Coyote and the Road Runner, to name just a couple.

So, if we did get through some of our heavy layers of seriousness to look at new at biblical stories in a fresh open way, will we see the humour?  I am sure there are some who might read this who will say this is bordering on the sacrilegious. Really? Your faith is that easy to knock over? You still don’t believe God created the sense of humour?

Were God or Jesus or the angels not “shape-shifting,” i.e. appearing in other forms, when they came to visit Abraham and Jacob? We just have not described it in those terms. What about the transformation of Lot’s wife into the proverbial pillar of salt?  What about the transformation of a bush in the desert into a fire in front of Moses? And what about Abraham and Sarah and even Zechariah and Elizabeth in the New Testament being promised children in their old age? There is no humour or trickery in that? Sarah laughed because she thought it was an impossible joke.

We could even look at some of the New Testament stories in this light. What about Jesus turning water into wine? Wasn't that a fine trick to play late in the wedding feast? What about Jesus scaring his disciples by walking across the water in the middle of the night? You can’t see any humour in that?  You mean you have never tried to scare someone in the dark?

I would postulate that similar events and the resulting stories occurred among many peoples. However, for reasons only God knows, it appears that he chose the Judeo-Christian tradition, especially in the incarnation of Jesus, to reveal himself most completely and fully. The history and context of that tradition, as we already mentioned with respect to the Reformation above, shaped and transformed many of those stories so that we no longer see them in the same humorous light in which other traditions still pass on their stories.

Of course, there is a lot more to it than that, but perhaps we have just become too heavy about it all. Maybe there are some ways we could just lighten up, even a little, and find more fun and enjoyment in our faith stories.  Which stories can you think of?

“The green dark forest, too silent to be real.”

I have had several occasions in the last couple of weeks to reflect on this line from “The  Canadian Railroad Trilogy” by my favourite Canadian folksinger/troubadour, Gordon Lightfoot.  I don’t think I ever asked him about this line - I did interview him once when I was in university, but that is another story  -  but I suspect it refers to the idea that the modern Western world we live in is too often too full of noise. Yet, that is our reality. Then, if we do get to go to the forest, it seems in contrast “too silent to be real.”

I have been wandering through (and wondering in) the forests since my childhood in northern Manitoba. I have to thank my parents for giving us the freedom to do so for hours at a time. Sometimes I did so with my brothers or friends, but often alone. In the latter situation, I became particularly fascinated with birdwatching and finding and repeatedly keeping an eye on their nests. Of course, if there were birds to see there were songs to hear.

Nowadays Lightfoot’s prescient line has taken on a new meaning for me. One can walk for hours in a West Coast rain forest, in the Rockies, or here in the Québec Laurentians, where I am this week, with scarcely hearing a bird. This phenomenon has been noticed by others and attributed to a worrisome decline in songbird population in North America. Some of this  appears to be due to the excessive use of herbicides and pesticides which have negative effects on reproduction when worked into the food chain. Another factor is likely the downright destruction of their habitat, not only here where they nest, but throughout the continent where they migrate south end need to feed en Route and where they spend their winters. Believe it or not, some also contend that not only the excessive numbers of feral cats but also your beloved household kitty whom you let out to run freely, kill a lot more birds than you realize. 

So, if you care for our bird population, if you appreciate their songs in the morning, and own a cat, do not let it out without a bell. Better still, only take it out on a leash if you wish to give it exercise beyond the confines of your home. Cut down on or eliminate the use of herbicides and pesticides. Indeed, many of our jurisdictions have begun to enact bylaws against their use within their boundaries. The Canadian Association of Physicians for the Environment, of which I’m a member, has been a strong lobbyist in this regard.   

We might not be able to do much about these factors and destruction of habitat beyond the bounds of our nation.  However, some of it refers to our exploitation of so-called Third World or developing nations’ peoples and lands for our own benefit. We have become used to imported, inexpensive, fruit, vegetables and even flowers, all of which require removal of natural habitat to be supplanted by gardens, orchards and plantations to provide our needs. Another reason to look more closely at the use of resources and foodstuff that have their origins near at hand, e.g. the hundred-mile diet.

Meanwhile, other voices in our world are telling us how much we need the green dark forests, not to mention all the fauna that inhabit them. There has even been research showing that those who take breaks from their work routine that include walks in the park function better in their offices subsequently than those who stayed at their desks or went to the staff room. Another study reported that schoolchildren who were bussed through treed areas and past parks also functioned better than those who were bussed through the more typical urban concrete. Indeed, educators and even mental health therapists who promote mindfulness both realize that we need to get back in touch with nature. The phrase, “Nature Deficit Disorder”, has even been coined.

As a Christian, this takes me back to the beginning, as The Bible Describes it. Besides being told to “multiply and replenish the earth,” to use the familiar old King James language, at least to those of us in my age and older, we were also told to “subdue and have dominion” over the earth. Unfortunately, increasingly with the industrialization of our society in the last few centuries, this has been interpreted as supporting the over-utilization and exploitation of the earth’s resources. We have interpreted this as giving us permission to control nature

Now some of us followers of The Way are realizing anew that there is  is another way to understand these passages. We are meant to look after the Earth as a gardener tends his garden, which is obviously the way God spoke to Adam about his role as a human on this planet. Good gardeners know how to “replenish the earth” by using age-old manual methods of controlling vegetation and returning plant material back to the earth. This is doing on a small scale what we need to do on a larger scale when it comes to ventures such as mining and forestry. The new slogan for this is Creation Care. The last several decades’ awakening to the realities of climate change and humanity’s contribution to it has only further fuelled (pardon the pun) the need for us to change our approach from exploitation of the land to caring for it. Let’s do it.  As another slogan has it, “It's the right thing to do.”

Our new government

GOVERNMENT OF CANADA CABINET MEMBERS 2015 11 4

This is the 29th Cabinet Ministry under the 23rd Prime Minister, drawn from a majority representation of 184 of 338 Members of Parliament in the election of October 19, 2015. I spent a good deal of time today watching the swearing in ceremony and making notes. I have never been so concerned about an election and its results as this one. There is a lot at stake here for the future of Canada. As I reflected on all the changes in the last 2 weeks I realized that, in the words of Joni Mitchell, “You don’t know what you’ve got till it’s gone.” We had grown complacent about what Canada was and where it was going. Governments changed in the last 75 years or so but not much really changed about Canadian fundamentals. Even the Progressive Conservatives were still invested in the Canada we all thought we know and valued. Then car the Conservatives minus the progressive and we saw how a majority government with an extreme agenda could so quickly dismantle what had been billing for over 100 years. The Conservatives tried to make a lot of the support they had but it obviously wasn’t what the majority of Canadians who voted wanted. Now, hope for our nation has returned.

So, here is ‘the list’ of the new Government of Canada cabinet. The order came from the site from which it was copied but the numbers following in parentheses are the sequence with which the ministers were sworn in. My hunch is that was a totally randomly selected sequence as I could determine no rhyme or reason for it, but maybe I did not give that enough thought. The notes following come from comments made during the event or from Wikipedia or other  on-line sources. 

After the list I have made note of some categories and also copied a map of representation from the web. 

1. (1) Justin Trudeau (Quebec) - Prime Minister, Intergovernmental Affairs and Youth. 

Previously MP and leader of the Liberal party, now PM at age 43, son of former Liberal 

      PM PE Trudeau who became PM in 1968 at age 49.

1. (2) Ralph Goodale (Saskatchewan) - Public Safety and Emergency Preparedness. First elected in 1974; in previous cabinet(s) and now in 4 committees. Committed to Restorative Justice.
2. (4) Lawrence MacAulay (P.E.I.) - Agriculture and Agri-Food. First elected in 1988.
3. (6) Stéphane Dion (Quebec) - Foreign Affairs. Previous Liberal leader and cabinet minister; first elected in 1996.
4. (8) John McCallum (Ontario) - Immigration, Citizenship and Refugees. Privy Council member. 
5. (3) Carolyn Bennett, MD (Ontario) - Indigenous and Northern Affairs; first elected in 1997. Has done a lot of medical work among First Nations in No. Ont. Former Minster of State for Public Health. She was chair of the Canada-Israel Friendship Group from 1999 to 2003 and is a member of Liberal Parliamentarians for Israel.
6. (9) Scott Brison (Nova Scotia) - Treasury Board President. Former Conservative but then Liberal Cabinet Minister after crossing the floor in 2003; married gay with children with his partner. First elected 1997.
7. (11) Dominic Leblanc (New Brunswick) - Leader of the Government in the House of Commons. First elected in 2000, born in Ottawa, Ontario, son of Roméo LeBlanc, former Governor General. As a child, he baby-sat Justin, Alexandre, and Michel Trudeau, the children of then-Prime Minister Pierre Trudeau. He has remained friends with Justin Trudeau, and endorsed his candidacy for Liberal leader in 2012.^[4] He earned a Bachelor of Arts degree in political science from the University of Toronto (Trinity College), a Bachelor of Laws degree from the University of New Brunswick, and then attended Harvard Law School, where he obtained his Master of Laws degree. Now in 6 committees, chairing one.
8. (13) Navdeep Bains (Ontario) - Innovation, Science and Economic Development. Law professor, MBA, CMA; first elected 2004. Carried his child out of Rideau Hall.
9. (15) Bill Morneau (Ontario) - Finance Minister. Millionaire head of HR firm who is a retirement and pension expert.
10. (5) Jody Wilson-Raybould (Granville - B.C.) - Justice and Attorney General of Canada. Vancouver lawyer, former Crown Prosecutor and Regional AFN chief.
11. (7) Judy Foote (Newfoundland and Labrador) - Public Services and Procurement. First elected in 2008.
12. (19) Chrystia Freeland (Ontario) - International Trade. Mother of 3; carried one out of Rideau Hall. Committee Chair, first elected in 2013, former Financial Times editor with Harvard and Oxford credentials. Ukrainian origin supporting Ukraine so strongly, as did mother, receiving Putin’s censure for the same.
13. (10) Jane Philpott, MD (Ontario) - Health. Worked extensively in West Africa where she lost a daughter.  She attends the Community Mennonite Church in Stouffville, Ontario where she is a respected hard-working member and song leader for the congregation.
14. (17) Jean-Yves Duclos (Quebec) - Families, Children and Social Development.
15. (20) Marc Garneau (Quebec, Westmoount-Ville Marie) - Transport - out-of-this world [former astronaut], first elected in 2008.
16. (12) Marie-Claude Bibeau (Quebec) - International Development and La francophonie. Involved with CIDA. 
17. (21) Jim Carr (Manitoba; Wpg. South Ctr.) - Natural Resources. MB Liberal. 
18. (14) Mélanie Joly (Quebec) - Heritage. Lawyer who ran for mayor of Montreal.
19. (16) Diane Lebouthillier (Quebec, Gaspe) - National Revenue. Mother and grandmother. 
20. (24) Kent Hehr (Alberta, Calgary) - Veterans Affairs, and Associate Minister of National Defence. Lawyer, paraplegic and former CPA head; first Liberal in Calgary since 1968.
21. (18) Catherine McKenna (Ontario) - Environment and Climate Change. Toronto lawyer.
22. (26) Harjit Sajjan (B.C.) - National Defence. Lt.Col.who served 3 times in Afghanisan and once in the former Yugoslavia; former VPD member and aide-de-camp to former Liberal cabinet minister from BC, Iona Campognolo.
23. (22) MaryAnn Mihychuk (Manitoba, Kildonan-St. Paul) - Employment Workforce Development and Labour. Ukrainian origin, former MB NDP cabinet minister.
24. (28) Amarjeet Sohi (Alberta, Edmonton) - Infrastructure and Communities. Former city councillor.
25. (23) Maryam Monsef (Ontario, Peterborough) - Democratic Institutions. Afghani immigrant 20 yrs. ago. Ist Liberal in riding since 1975.
26. (25) Carla Qualtrough (B.C., Delta) - Sport, and Persons with Disabilities. Visually-impaired lawyer, Paralympics competitor who defeated Kerri-Lynn Findlay of the Conservatives.
27. (30) Hunter Tootoo (Nunavut) - Fisheries and Oceans, and Canadian Coastguard. Former long-time mayor of Iqaluit, Speaker of the Nunavut Territorial Assembly.
28. (27) Kirsty Duncan (Ontario, Toronto) - Science. PhD with education and experience in medical geography, an influenza epidemic expert, UT professor who served on the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, an organization that won the 2007 Nobel Prize with Al Gore.
29. (29) Patricia Hajdu (Ontario, Thunder Bay) - Status of Women. Expert on issues of drug and alcohol abuse who has worked a lot in N. On. and run a womens’ shelter. Won buy a narrow recount. She obtained a Masters of Public Administration from the University of Victoria.
30. (31) Bardish Chagger (Ontario, Kitchener-Waterloo) - Small Business and Tourism. Multicultural activist.

Category breakdown

Females (15) - fulfilling a campaign promise of 50% female representation “because it’s 2015,“ as Trudeau said after the swearing in of the new cabinet ministers. This out of 88 female MPs altogether, the most ever elected. Harper had 10 females in his last cabinet of 38. There will be 7 males and 4 females on the central council

Indigenous (2): Jody Wilson-Raybould, Hunter Tootoo   

Disabled (2): Kent Hehr,Carla Qualtrough

Former ministers (5):

Stefane Dion, Ralph Goodale, John McCallum, Carolyn Bennett [Jr.], Scott Brison

Regional Representation:

Maritimes (4): Lawrence McAulay [PEI], Scott Brison [NS], Dominic LeBlanc [NB], Judy Foote [NFL]

Quebec (7, 4  from greater Montreal): Justin Trudeau [MTRL], Stephane Dion [MTRL], Marie-Claude Bibeau, Melanie Joly [MTRL],, Diane Lebouthillier, Marc Garneau [MTRL], Jean-Yves Duclos [Q City]

BUT no so-called Quebec Lieutenant in this government as opposed to in many previous administrations.  

Ontario (11, 7 from greater Toronto): Bill Morneau [TO], Carolyn Bennett [TO], Catherine McKenna [TO], Chrystia Freeland [TO], John McCallum [TO], Jane Philpott, Navdeep Bains [TO], Maryam Monsef, Kirsty Duncan [TO], Patricia Hajdu, Bardish Chugger

The West (): Jody Wilson Raybould, Ralph Goodale [SK], James Carr [MB], Maryann Mihychuk [MB], Kent Hehr [AB], Carla Qualtrough [BC], Harjit Sajjan [BC], Amarjeet Sohi [AB]

Punjabi (4 out of 20 elected): Harjit Sajjan [BC], Amarjeet Sohi [AB], Bardish Chugger [ON], Navdeep Bains [ON]

But no Chinese - too bad; too many new immigrants voted Conservative and many Canadian-Chinese vote NDP.

CF – BHS & I

In the summer of 1968, when I was visiting my parents at Meadow Lake, Saskatchewan, where they had moved to from Winnipeg year earlier, we took an evening drive out to the lake. There were some seaplanes at the dock there, including a Norseman and a Cessna 180. My father looked at the Norseman and said to me, "That is the one you rode on when you were a baby."

I am not sure if I had heard the story before, but I have certainly heard it since, most notably from my mother's father, Grandpa Frank F Enns. He felt he had to tell me it when I was doing a video-taped interview of him near the end of his life.

My parents were working as a missionary couple, a young minister and his wife if you will, for the United Church of Canada in Oxford House, Manitoba, where they were stationed from 1945-1947. In the late summer of 1946, my mother made her way to her parents' place on the farm where she had grown up in the Burwalde District north of the town of Winkler, Manitoba. After I was born and deemed old enough to travel, my grandfather took my mother and myself by train to what was then the end of the railroad at The Pas. This was where Tom Lamb would fly us out of to join my father in Oxford house.

I can re-check the details but it seems to me there were 2 problems. This was early December. It was what we in the north called "freeze-up." It was the time of year between when you could land on the lake with pontoons and when you could safely land on it with skis. So, in part we were stuck in The Pas waiting for the ice to be strong enough to land on. However, I think we may have been delayed to that point because of mechanical problems with the plane. The plane was the Nordouyn Norseman CF-DHS.

In any case, it wasn't until December that we took off from The Pas. For some reason it was late in the day, which is short there at that time of the year in any case, and we needed to make a landing in Norway House. Perhaps we had goods to unload or people that were destined for that location as well. In any case, it was really getting rather dark as we circled to land. The pilot thought he saw the strip on the ice which we were to land on, as there were evergreen branches on both sides of it. This was a common way of marking landing strips on snow-covered lakes in the north. However, again, in the deepening blue of the snow in the rapidly fading light, he could see figures running back and forth across the strip brandishing what appeared to be burning torches. There was nothing to it but to land somewhere else nearby.

Then the pilot and his passengers learned the awful truth. Those evergreens were to mark out where the locals had just made their first cutting of ice for fish preservation. If we had landed there, we would have gone straight through into the freezing waters.

I suspect this story meant so much to my grandfather because, not only was it an account of how his daughter and grandson were saved a possible death. It possibly also indicated to him, man of faith that he was. that we were destined for more.

In any case, it was not until my late 60s when I was thinking about my past and looking into aircraft that have been part of it, that I discovered more of the history of this aircraft.

Here’s a snapshot of its history:

New from the factory, the aircraft was registered as CF-BHS to Tom Lamb of Lamb Airways of The Pas, Manitoba, Canada, on October 4, 1945. Twenty-one years later, on May 16, 1966, the aircraft was sold to G.M. Clark and John F. Midgett of Meadow Lake, Saskatchewan, It was reregistered to C and M Airways of La Loche, in 1971, while on September 28, 1989 it was registered to La Loche Airways.

While taxiing on Cree Lake on October 11, 1989, fire broke out and the aircraft was beached on Prowse Island and subsequently damaged beyond repair by the fire. The registration was cancelled on April 4, 1990. Eighteen years later its remains had been rebuilt to static display in the colours of Lamb Airways and on June 28, 2008 unveiled on a pedestal in the Lions Park, Thompson, Manitoba, to commemorate the bush plane and their bush pilots, especially Tom Lamb.

http://1000aircraftphotos.com/Contributions/Lambair/8510.htm
 

And here's Tom Lamb receiving it from the factory a short while earlier:

‪http://www.lambair.com/.../page51/files/page51-1001-full.jpg

Lambair has their own website at:

http://www.lambair.com/

 

At the top of their website is a picture of Tom and his sons Greg, Jack, Don, Dennis, Conrad (youngest), etc. Some of these names I remember well from my childhood in Grand Rapids, Manitoba [1948-1957]. By that time, Tom’s sons were already flying with him. The early Norsemen and Beavers were being augmented by smaller, faster, more modern Cessna 170 and 180s.

Their history is summarized on their website:

Lambair, which was incorporated in 1935 as Lamb Airways Limited, began with one aircraft - a Stinson SR8 five passenger plane. This plane was used to haul fish from The Pas, Manitoba to the rail head at Cormorant before the fish froze and before the market fell in Chicago. Tom Lamb, who established the airline, bought the Stinson in 1930 and taught himself to fly it.

Lambair grew from public demand, as there was no other means of transportation for fish to market at the time except horse-drawn sleighs. Airplanes shortened the time to market and ensured higher quality fish to the large North American market. While transportation of fish, fur, trappers and fisherman were its primary business, the largest expansion of Lambair was during the construction of the mid-Canada line during the 1950's. The airline served all of Canada and parts of the United States and Greenland during its years in service. Lambair continued to haul fish, but its primary cargo was people - Inuit families from Resolute, Northwest territories to the far Arctic island hunting camps; equipment - oil drilling rigs to Sable Island from Halifax and food supplies. Medical evacuations and emergency mercy flights also accounted for a substantial amount of the company's traffic from the far north.

I still remember one of those "mercy flights." Again, it was "freeze-up." Some of the men of the community, my father included, had gone out to begin to cut their wood supply for the winter before the snow got too deep and made it more difficult to call their loads back to the community. Suddenly, one of the young man, Norman McKay, severely gashed his foot. It was thought he needed to be taken to the nearest hospital, which was The Pas. A huge crew of men where quickly gathered together to hack down enough trees and pile enough snow together on the strip of land so cleared for a plane with skis to land on it. Lamb air was contacted by one of the local trader's radios and I think it was one of their new Cessnas that came in and took Norman out to get his foot fixed up. That was the beginning of the Grand Rapids air strip.

As development in the north progressed, Lambair opened new bases and served Wabowden, Thompson, Churchill, Norway House and Gillam as well as The Pas. These bases were established to serve all of northern Manitoba and the North West Territories. It carried out its own maintenance operations in its hangers at Churchill, Thompson and The Pas and in 1965 built a new headquarters at The Pas.

At the time, Lambair was Canada's oldest airline still under the original management. Upon the death of Tom Lamb in 1969, the founder's six sons, all pilot-engineers, ran the airline. By 1979, Lambair had a fleet which included Bristol freighters, twin otters, Otters, Beavers, Cessna 180s, Bell G4A helicopters, Twin Islanders, Aztecs and DC-3s. The planes were purchased from all over the world including Norway, England and Afghanistan. This fleet offered the greatest variety of aircraft to look after the traffic of the north, according to Donald Lamb, President of Lambair, in 1973. The combination of heavy freight aircraft with short takeoff and landing aircraft, to the fast light instrument flight rules (IFR) twin engine planes allowed the company to take on assignments for governments, oil companies, mining operations and continue to haul passengers throughout the north. The helicopters were for prospecting, hydro-electric development and forestry operations.

BOOKS: 

Lambair's history is detailed in the autobiography of Jack Lamb, "My Life in the North".

 

The youngest of the six flying Lamb brothers, Conrad Lamb has written his memoirs of living and working in northern Canada. "From Tractor Train to Bush Plane" is a series of stories about Conrad and his adventures while aiding in the development of the north.

In 1984, Pulitzer Prize winning author Leland Stowe published a biography of Tom Lamb called The Last Great Frontiersman. The book was based on a series of taped interviews (available on this website) with Tom Lamb prior to his death and with family members after. The book is out of print.

 Hilda Lamb Herbert was the middle daughter and middle child of THP and Caroline Lamb. The sister of Tom and Gladys (Billie), Hilda writes about her life growing up in remote northern Manitoba  In The Lambs of Moose Lake.

Gladys Lillian Lamb Allan also known as Billie documented her family’s early life at Moose Lake Manitoba in the book “Dew Upon the Grass”. This book is out of print.

And the BHS Norseman is featured here:

http://www.lambair.com/page28/page39/page62/page51/index.html

The slogan Tom and his pilot sons went by was: "Do not ask us where we fly . . . Tell us where you want to go"

Here is also my father's photo of the Norseman he remembered unloading supplies at Oxford House, MB in 1946. And look at the license letters on the side: BHS!

Here is probably how it looked when my mother and I rode on it in December 1946 [photo from Lambair website]:

Photographed ca. 1954, from Jack Lamb via Bill Ewing, it looks like it is being overhauled:

http://1000aircraftphotos.com/Contributions/Lambair/8510.htm

 Here is, I believe, Tom himself with it in Grand Rapids, or a different one - Lambair had 6 of them: MK4 CF-FUU Leased, MK5 CF-MAM snN29 26, MK5 CF-BHS snN29-7 1945, MK6 CF-GUQ, MK6 CF-INN and MK6 CF-ILR [photo from my father]

Here it is on some remote northern lake with a Husky and a Bell helicopter [photo from Lambair website]:

And finally, here's my photo of BHS 22 yrs later as I finally saw it again in Meadow Lake SK, in 1968.

And, finally, it’s last resting place [photos from the Thompson tourism website]:

Here’s another version of the story behind that:

A dedicated group of volunteers worked evenings and weekends for over two years to restore this crashed Norseman float plane that lay in the swamp near Garden Hill, Manitoba since 1969.  The rusty shell was rescued and brought to life in Thompson under the supervision of Fred Palmer and Marion Morberg. The plane, now fully restored sits atop a 14-ft tall pedestal in the Thompson Lions Club Park and is part of Thompson's Spirit Way walkway.   
Norseman float planes were the only such planes built in Canada.  These workhorses were critical in the development and evolution of Northern Canada.  Their unique three bladed prop and fabric skin made them legendary.  Only a few still fly today. 
Dedicated pilots in the North risked their lives to move supplies and people across the wide expanse of Northern Manitoba tundra and boreal forest.  
This stunning site pays tribute to the pilots, mechanics and support staff in northern aviation. 

Location:

Mystery Lake Road, right before the Miles Hart Bridge.

Website:

thompsonspiritway.ca

Lorne Brandt, acknowledging these photos, except for the ones my father took in Oxford House and Grand Rapids and the one I took in Meadow Lake are all 'borrowed' and can be found on the internet as cited.

2015 8 26