Letters to the Editor

Can't agree fully

I am a great admirer of Roy Lawrence and have bought three of his books. He is a wonderful source of inspiration. However, in his article Communion of Saints (March-May, p12-13) he states that we can only ‘properly' address prayer to God, which I cannot fully agree with. This is because whether we pray, on occasion, directly to saints for their intercessions and receive powerful direct assistance from or give praise to God, or whether we pray directly to him and he sends his assistance by way of his messengers and administrators - the angels and saints – it is very similar.

There seems to be no ‘proper' way except we can look at it this way. How often do we ‘make a request' to a dear friend, acquaintance or family member to pray for us? As there is so much power in prayer, the intercessions of others, which includes the saints, is always so very valuable.

Mrs JG (via email)

Roy Lawrence replies:

It may well be that Mrs JG and I differ mainly in the terminology we use. Like Mrs JG, I often ask others to pray for me, and it is important to me to believe that I can request the prayers of fellow-Christians, whether they belong to today's Church or are saints who have passed from this world into the mystery of eternity. I don't find myself thinking of these requests as 'prayers' themselves. I think of it myself as 'communion' with the saints rather than 'praying' to them. For me personally, 'prayer' is a word which I use only in connection with God.

Encouraging words

What a wonderful surprise to open the March/May issue of the Plain Truth – all unsuspecting – and find my article Once upon a Time printed on page 22!

Thank you Fiona for your encouraging comments, they mean a lot to folks like me. I too am a member of the Association of Christian Writers and my husband and I run a local group in our home.

Hazel Bradshaw

It was good to hear from Hazel and that she was greatly encouraged by the publication of her article in our First Break section of the last issue as well as Fiona's critique of the piece.

As Bryony Wood says in her article The Power of Words, we should never underestimate the powerful impact our words can have on others – in both a positive and negative way.

And if there are any budding, as-yet-unpublished authors out there, read Fiona's comments describing how you can submit an article for consideration in this section of our magazine.

Whistle-blowers

The Plain Truth must inspire many to grow in their Christian life and we all owe your team a debt of thanks. I enjoyed reading the article Should Christians bother with animals by Gethin Russell-Jones (March-May) and learned a few things from it. The RSPCA is a wonderful organization but perhaps one day they will be given proper authority to deal properly with animals; at present there are so many restrictions, they can barely do a half of what they are capable. There are also far too few staff to cover the many calls on their time. If all Christians did their bit and became ‘whistle-blowers' it would really help all creatures in this country and elsewhere.

Mr JT Salisbury

The job of being ‘whistle-blowers' does seem to be an important factor in bringing many cases of neglect and cruelty to the attention of organisations like the RSPCA. In fact, this was the case as was shown in a recent case that hit the national media on 2 April where 30 dead or dying cows were found by RSPCA inspectors in Suffolk. The distress to the animals was only brought out after a tip-off. If you know about an animal that is injured or being treated cruelly, you can call the RSPCA's national 24-hour cruelty and advice line on 0300 1234 999.

No ‘Royal' status

I read the article Should Christians bother with animals? in the March-May issue of your magazine, and being fond of animals myself, share the sentiments expressed. However, I would not go so far as to describe myself as ‘a lover of animals'. I think this sentiment can be taken too far. I firmly believe that, in the order of things, human beings rank higher than animals, and why shouldn't that be so? Surely Man (Woman) was created in God's image?

Don't misunderstand me: I also strongly believe in protecting animals as they are rightly called ‘God's creatures'.

My chosen Charities are the NSPCC and The Children's Society because I believe they should have first priority – not animals.

The article also highlights this strange attitude that people have in regard to animals. I always find it strange that we have The Royal Society for the Protection of Cruelty to Animals and The Royal Society for the Protection of Birds but the more important Society – in my opinion – the NSPCC, does not have this ‘Royal' approval. Why is this? Does it tell us something about Society? I wonder.

Dr BH BFPO 15

Dr BH makes a good point and it often comes up in discussion in the UK – especially in some of the national newspapers. People often joke that it shows the British are more fond of animals than children. However, we should not assume that the NSPCC would be any more effective if it became the ‘RSPCC'. Barnado, for example, has neither ‘Royal' nor ‘National' in its title nor do many of our larger cancer charities which as well as being huge are also very effective charities.

Chartered Accountants, as it happens do not have a Royal Warrant. What they have, like all ‘Chartered' institutions, is a Royal Charter. Companies have Articles of Association or By-Laws, some very large organisations are run under Statutes and professional bodies (or the more senior ones anyway) have Royal Charters. Livery Companies all have Charters too. But a Royal Charter does not entitle an organisation to use the word ‘Royal' in its name.

Back in work

I have been out of work for a year, but praise God, I am finally back in employment and wish to express my thanks both to God and yourselves with a donation to The Plain Truth. Your magazine has been a constant and much-needed friend during this time and I do thank you for sending it to me even when I couldn't afford to give you a penny!

May you continue to be a light in the darkness.

Mrs JEV Cornwall

We are very pleased to hear that Mrs JEV is now back in work. And we're also happy that through the generous donations of other subscribers, she was able to continue receiving The Plain Truth as well as it being a ‘friend' to her during her time of unemployment. We wish you well in your new job Mrs JEV.

Can't you change?

After reading all the latest coverage in the media about the harm plastic bags have on the environment, I have just received my latest issue of The Plain Truth – in a plastic wrapper.

Media reports say that plastic wrappings and bags are not only harmful to wildlife, but they take hundreds – or even thousands – of years to decompose. So why can't The Plain Truth change to using paper envelopes to mail its magazine to its readers and become more environmentally-friendly?

Anon

We have had one or two of our readers ask the same question recently, and instead of responding to them individually, thought it would be a good opportunity to explain our reasons for using polythene mailing wrappers on our letters page.

The wrapping we use for The Plain Truth is a biodegradable polythene which is made from ‘Polybatch DEG 68' – we use film of 30 microns thick. The properties of this product are that once exposed to light, degradation of the film will continue until it has broken down into carbon dioxide, water and a small amount of inert mineral matter. And in composting situations, the time for degradation can be less than two months. So we hope that this has answered the question of those concerned about the matter.

We are aware that many readers are especially both interested and concerned in the care of our environment and avoiding unnecessary pollution and get actively involved in helping organisations with the same aims. Our interview with Dave Bookless, National Director of A Rocha, on page 14 of this issue should be of particular interest to them.