The Mailbox is the online version of the letters’ page, and now features comments sent directly to the editor, those posted at the end of articles, or contributed through our social media channels. 

To have your say on any issue, story or opinion piece please fill in the comment section at the end of any article, or contact This e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it . Comments may be edited for length and clarity.

Re: Christians who do not go to church

We need to reflect on how we ever got ourselves in a position where "going to church" was a meaningful phrase. Church as place or church as institution ought never to have entered our thinking. I go to footbal matches, or to the theatre or to interesting places to visit - nothing wrong in that. But as Christians we ARE the body of Christ - I'll stop there before it turns into a sermon.
Simon Oxley (via Facebook)

Really interesting article. I think we need to move to a more interactive worship style using the skills and variety we find in the media we are so used to watching and listening to. The skill is to also to do this with reverence and worship that is worthy.
Mustard Seed Games (via Facebook)

Excellent article what I found interesting was that people were not at church, but at least some were still connecting with Christians, in some way. For support, prayer and sharing needs concerns etc. I wonder if there are other people not at church, unable, unwilling or unsure how to find others outside formal congregations?
Dave Eadie (via Facebook)

We are still encouraged to meet together, the issues in the valleys old smelly buildings, full of damp, mildew, spiders webs, no facilities, uncomfortable and regimented seats with leaders who discouraged modern forms and do not want young people spoiling the place. this is what has killed the church meeting place.
Chris Parker Jones (via Facebook)

We are the church not the building we are the army of God and we are marching forward to GLORY

Stan Eyles (via Facebook)

Re: Eve's story about leaving the church

What an amazingly honest article! I feel I I could have written it myself with very little need to edit any of it as it applies also to me. I'm the secretary of a small Baptist Church and also lead worship with the guitar and voice and preach every month - for years it's seemed like an up-hill struggle to stop the church folding - and for what? Wouldn't we be better off sharing our faith with those who will never venture up the steps into the chapel - those we should be out there helping - have we become trapped by religion and commitment to the 'church constitution?'

I felt like I was set free when I became a Christian at the age of 28 and after progressing and growing in my faith to the dizzy heights of 'secretary' - could it be that the ladder was leaning against the wrong wall? How do we set ourselves free from this - surely it's in the scripture "Now the Lord is the Spirit, and where the Spirit of the Lord is, there is freedom". and also "Then you will know the truth, and the truth will set you free." It's true that we shouldn't "give up the habit of meeting together - as some are in the habit of doing" but how does a small church survive if we all clear off and let ourselves be led somewhere else? - Isn't that just another of the enemy's temptations? The answer must be honest, fervent prayer and a sincere desire to be led by the Holy Spirit - whatever that results in - (so long as it doesn't contradict scripture).
Rob Brown

Re: Unique service includes the baptisms and confirmations of teenagers from four churches

Like many others I was interested to hear about the ecumenical baptism and confirmation service held recently in Huddersfield, and I rejoice with those who committed their lives to Christ on that occasion.

I do not want to rain on anyone's parade, but I question the tag you gave it as 'unique'. From the late 1980s the churches in Milton Keynes have held such services on a regular basis, and I recall baptising and/or confirming no less than 39 people in a single service, together with one of the bishops of the Oxford diocese and the local Methodist Minister, at the Cross and Stable church in MK in the early 1990s, and all eight churches were member congregations of the BUGB.

The event was also recorded in the Baptisms column of The Baptist Times! So, well done Huddersfield - we know how wonderful such an experience must have been! 

The Revd Michael J. Cleaves

Baptist Team Minister, Ecumenical Parish of Stantonbury, Milton Keynes, 1987 – 1998

Thanks be to God for such a glorious coming together. As one who was "born & bred Welsh Anglican, committed my life to Christ and ordained Presbyterian, accredited Baptist now on Methodist "Plan" licensed to Conduct Communion (by extension!) in my local C/E church frequently attending our local Coptic Orthodox church -sounds to me like a fortaste of Heaven. May the "Huddesfield experience" lead the way for our future in the UK roll on acceptance fully of our mutual ordination and sacraments Hallelujah.

The Revd Bill Miles

Re: Lords pass Same Sex Couples Bill

I thought your article on the House of Lords passing the Same Sex marriage bill summed up the problem with how this has been done. The Quaker rep said, 'We welcome the Bill because it is right for us ... and it will not be imposed on other faith bodies who do not yet share our view.'

Already moves in the European Courts show us it may well be imposed on those who disagree, but what matters as they simply "do not yet share our view". In a democracy what was needed was an open discussion, what we got was one fundamentalist group who were determined to force their views on the unenlightened until they submit.

By enlarge Christians have been willing to look into their position even at great personal pain and risk, but sadly this has not been reciprocated - how can it be when you know that you have a monopoly on the truth as the listening Society of Friends clearly do?
Peter Cook
Bristol

Re: What the devil are they playing at?

My name is Debbie Moon, and I've been a Christian for 25 years. I'm also the creator and lead writer of the CBBC series 'Wolfblood', and as such, I read Anna Hancock's article on fantasy series on CBBC with great interest.
Of course every parent must make their own decisions on what they consider suitable for their children to watch. But I think there are some wider points to consider here.

The human brain is hard wired for metaphor, simile and allegory. Without the ability to use X to represent Y, we would be unable to process the vast amounts of information that the world throws at us minute by minute, let alone make any decisions about it. One of the great strengths of Christianity is that it understands and uses our capacity for imaginative thinking. From the parables of Jesus to the equivalence of bread & wine to body & blood, ours is a faith that constantly uses a fantastical image to represent a real truth.

I think we sometimes get so caught up in trying to prove the facts of our faith that we forget the immense power of metaphor, and the way we can use it to examine morality, and ourselves. Children instinctively understand this power. They use fantastical figures like the vampire and the werewolf to examine their own instincts and fears from a safe distance.

Children often feel overwhelmed by their own emotions and darker impulses, and these fictions allow them a safe space in which to acknowledge that 1) they too have a dark side, and 2) it doesn't have to control them. These mythical figures have persisted across thousands of years simply because they represent aspects of ourselves, aspects that we must acknowledge if we are ever to overcome them, or to explain the behaviour of those around us.

I'm a freelancer, and I can't speak for CBBC in any way, but I suspect they won't ever show a series containing explicit Christian content. For myself, I don't believe they should. I wouldn't want any publicly-funded channel to favour any creed or faith - even my own!

So in the absence of explicitly Christian content, isn't it better to have programming that embodies the Christian truths of love, hope, peace, kindness and tolerance - even if the metaphors and allegories being used initially appear strange or even alarming?

In the end, the purpose of faith is to provide answers - but the purpose of art is to provoke questions. I grew up in a household deeply hostile to religious faith, and the TV programmes I watched, and the moral debates they embodied, shaped me in such a way that I went looking for meaning, and found God. I'd like to think that Wolfblood, and all the other CBBC shows, will send their viewers on a similar quest.

Debbie Moon

I entirely agree! It's time God's Word was brought back into our society...
We Christians all know how that satan works, and, as light as these children's programmes may seem to non-Christians, we Christians know full well satans intentions. Our societly has moved so far away from God's values, it on a downward spiral, why can't 'the powers that be' in the TV world get things sorted out, it's way beyond time....We need Christians on board in the TV world, but, I guess if they wear a cross they won't be accepted for the job even if they got to an interview!!!
Thanks, that's my rant over with....for now.

Christine Fisher

That is so true Anna! Enjoyed reading your article.

Hannah Weston

This is interesting reading but as a primary school librarian/teacher and youth leader at my church I would like to give a slightly different perspective.

I well remember a few years ago when we had a long series of "Storymakers" on TV and the "Miraclemaker" film was shown a number of times, all stories form the Bible. So yes, TV has used Biblical material. But we need to recognise that we no longer live under the sacred canopy of Christianity in Britain. To all intents and purposes, we live in a secular society.

A few years back, many in the church, said that the Harry Potter books were some sort of secret occult world which would mean full scale converstion of our children to the devil. It didn't happen.

I have worked in primary schools and with children in churches now for 40 years and each scare in the Christian world doesn't have the dreaded results predicted on children.These fictional fads pass.

Don't underestimate a child's intelligence. Kids aren't stupid. Children learn about fiction and non-fiction from Reception classs upwards.They do know the difference.

I don't believe the devil has horns and a red coat, do you really? That is a medievil construct, a silly cartoon charcater. Satan and evil are much more subtle. Vampires don't exist. Werwolves don' t exist. And kids know that. Do we stop children listening to fairy stories? Some of them are every violent indeed. What about many of the OT stories? Violent and bloodthirsty. Hardly children's material. The Bible was not after all wrtten as a children's book.

Ultimately good (God) will defeat evil but for the vast majority of people in the world today, including our children, that isn't always the case during their lives. Brothers, sister, garndparents and even parenst die, become ill or have accidents. Thus causing very real unhappiness. Bad things do happen to good people, whether we like it or not. We must be careful that we don't perpetuate lies and promise the impossible to our children.

We should be worrying and fighting against the very real evils that our kids are encountering day by day. Evils that really do harm them:
physical and mental bullying by other children and adults; unrealistic expectations made by adults which cause stress; disrupted families that cause confusion and hurt; eating disorders; self-harm; trying to force children to achieve our abitions and not theirs; drugs; the over sexualisation of our kids on the media; abuse - neglect, physical, sexual, mental; internet misuse; grooming - do I need to go on?

As Christians let us fight against the real evils where Satan is, that our kids will encounter in the real world, not fictional characters from the TV screen.

Moira Kleissner

Re: Monday morning plenary session - discussion on same sex relationships

I'm delighted that this session has taken place - too often I feel we have ignored this issue or felt that it was too decisive to discuss together. I wasn't present but it sounds as if things were handled very well.

Andrew Kleissner

I was delighted to read the report of this session. I know that for some people this is a difficult issue but we do need to talk and explore together, the sooner the better.

Audrey Rowland

I welcomed this opportunity and was impressed at how Assembly behaved but while there may have been a resounding yes from the floor but there was no opportunity (other than silent dissent) to say 'no'

Craig

Am I alone in finding the BT roundup coverage of the plenary session at the Assembly on Monday morning a little less than accurate? The headline is "Monday morning plenary session: discussion on same sex relationships", it then goes on to state that "It started with a Bible study conducted by ...".

Although this is chronologically correct Mr Marshall's own comments need to be noted "the passage doesn't directly address the issue of sexuality". The Bible study was scheduled in the context of the original plan for the morning as in the assembly programme - "To include Bible Study ... Resolutions and a time to hear what God had been saying to us during the assembly". This was long before the discussion on same sex relationships was thought of, presumably in the light of recent pronouncements by prominent Baptist ministers. The study was not in any way one entity with the discussion that followed it.

Your readers also need to know that there was no open plenary discussion of the issue, nor was there any attempt to take the issue to scripture, rather what we were asked for was our own subjective personal feelings on the subject.

Nor was this the prelude to wider discussion in the union, churches were asked to submit their feelings by email, but policy will be decided by the members of council alone later in the year.

I worry that this seems to be a part of a wider trend in Baptist life, that decisions are made by an unelected synod - the council - without reference to, or wider discussion with, the churches who are the union. So for example we are asked to fill in voting forms for a President, basically a one year preaching tour, but the General Secretary is selected by a small group chosen by council, approved by council, and then members of the assembly are asked to endorse the single choice with no space given to prayer and background information being issued to help the decision (by the way I think Lyn's a great choice, it's just the method I question). Would you behave in this way in your churches?

I think we need to go back to a basic understanding of who we are - the Baptist union is a verb not a noun, it is what you get when the constituent churches are united, not when an unrepresentative body that tries to impose its wishes on the churches. Likewise with association, it is a verb, it is what we do when we, the churches associate together, not a label applied to a bureaucracy.

This is a really tricky issue that will require much prayer and soul searching, and some serious discussion, a process not helped by the rash actions of some and the glare of the media, but surely the struggle is where we believe we find the mind of Christ, not on the front page of the Guardian, or in the edicts of the council.

Peter Cook