The national debate on medicare
is about loving your neighbour as yourself, said several speakers
at the Ottawa "roundtable" on February 28. The event
was sponsored by the Ecumenical Health Care Network of the Canadian
Council of Churches.
The 100 participants, including church leaders and health care
providers, urged Canadians to bring this message to the hearings
being held by the Romanow Commission, as well as to their members
of parliament and Health Minister Anne McLellan.
The Romanow Commission on "The future of health care"
is expected to bring in changes soon after its report is submitted
in November.
Most speakers at the roundtable feared there will be some dismantling
of the medicare system. They argued strongly that health care
is not a commodity to be placed on the market, that Canadian society
has a moral responsibility to provide it equitably, and that for-profit
systems are not only less equitable but more expensive.
Nualla Kenny, a U.S.-born Roman Catholic nun and deputy minister
of health in Nova Scotia, said she fears Canada is moving away
from its communitarian ethic toward the more libertarian U.S.
approach.
Michael Rachlis of Toronto pointed out that before the introduction
of medicare, expenditures on health care in Canada, as a percentage
of the gross domestic product, were about the same as those in
the U.S. Under medicare, Canadian expenditures were lower than
in the U.S. It was also noted that while Americans with money
can get more "high end" services more quickly, some
40 million Americans are without insurance.
Though the speakers supported medicare, they said some things
need to change. The current system, said Rachlis, follows a "battlefield
model" Medicare From page 11 where you set up a hospital
with doctors and nurses and then wait for the casualties to come
in. The reality is that we have many people, especially older
people, who need only a low level of care but on an ongoing basis.
This situation should lead to more out-patient care, to having
essential drugs covered by medicare, and to multi-disciplinary
health centres with social workers, chaplains, and counsellors,
in addition to doctors and nurses. The speakers noted that many
doctors are open to such an approach, but doctors' associations
tend to object.
Speakers also said there should be more incentives for family
doctors, noting that specialists work fewer hours and receive
far more money. They also noted that advances in science and technology
attract a lot of interest, but their high cost means they cannot
be available for everyone. This raises the question whether people
with money should then be prevented from buying them.
Speakers noted that the Walkerton water crisis brought things
into perspective. Suddenly people thought less about MRIs and
CAT-scans and more about investing in clean water systems. The
former are individualistic health procedures while the latter
are more communal and social.
Speakers said that the health of Canadians is better than ever
but that we worry about it more. They also claimed that "spiritual"
or "religious" people are healthier and that non-medical
dimensions of health care should be given more scope, though not
uncritically. They deplored the growing interest in cosmetic surgery
as well as the idea that poor people from other countries should
be allowed to sell their organs to Canadians.
Despite frustrations with long waiting lines, most ordinary Canadians
want the medicare system saved, said speakers. But certain "elites"
assume it cannot be done. That view, some said, is based not on
realities, but on an ideological assumption that governments can't
do anything well. Speakers said saving medicare would not require
large amounts of new money, though the focus should be more on
prevention and low level care than on hospital beds and technology.
Canada is at a turning point, speakers said, and people who believe
that we are to bear one another's burdens must speak out now.
More information is available from the Canadian Council of Churches,
from Kairos, from the Catholic Health Association of Canada, and
at the Romanow website: www.healthcarecommission.ca.
-Bill Janzen
The writer is
director of the Ottawa Office of Mennonite Central Committee Canada.
One of my first intercultural
encounters took place in a shopping mall when my classmate came
out of the public washroom to exclaim, "There are footprints
on the toilet bowl!" This was new. Why would someone go to
all that trouble, and put themselves in such a precarious position?
That the incident remains so clearly etched in my memory is an
indication of how perplexed I was.
Since arriving in China, I've often been perplexed. Usually it
is just when I feel I am starting to understand what is going
on around me that something completely unexpected and totally
inexplicable occurs. The frustrating thing is that most of these
actions that I dismiss as the senseless acts of people who know
no better turn out to be perfectly reasonable.
When my students told me that their talent show would be broadcast
on a Hong Kong TV station, I had a hard time hiding my disbelief.
At the appointed time, though, there they were on channel 9, courtesy
of the college's A-V department which had cut the Hong Kong feed
and were broadcasting the show over the college's cable system.
Were my students right? Yes. Was I relieved I hadn't told my students
there was no way they would appear on Hong Kong TV? Very much
so.
Sharing a common faith does not prevent misunderstandings. When
a local pastor commented to my wife about the Christmas decorations
plastered all over Nanchong's stores, hotels, and karaoke bars,
she sympathized with him about the crass commercialization of
something precious.
"You," he replied, "really don't understand our
position here. The church is so very small in our society. Most
people have never heard of Christianity. How could you understand
that, coming from the West?" He feels that the acceptance
and support of Christmas in the marketplace will legitimate its
celebration in the church.
So how does one minimize intercultural misunderstandings? Much
of what I have read, experienced, and learned (often the hard
way) is summed up by Mary Doria Russell in her novel, Children
of God, which depicts a close encounter between Jesuit priests
and aliens. The beginning of intercultural understanding, a priest
advises, is going from saying, "This doesn't make sense"
to saying, "I don't understand." This necessitates relinquishing
the stance of a patronizing judge and critic in order to approach
another culture as a humble, receptive learner who is slow to
pass judgement and quick to admit the limitations of his or her
own understanding.
Paul writes of the gospel as foolishness to Gentiles. It could
be nothing else to those who respond with, "This doesn't
make sense." Those who admit that they don't understand it
may come to understand the gospel as something else. This admission
isn't easy, and my initial reflex is too often to dismiss actions
I don't understand as simply what people do when they don't know
how to do it the right (i.e. western) way.
I am making progress, though, and last week I taught my four-year-old
daughter, who has grown up using squat toilets, how to stand on
a public toilet. I did make a point of showing her how to wipe
off her footprints.-Todd Hanson
The writer has been teaching in China since 1991 with Mennonite mission boards and China Educational Exchange. He is from Christopher Lake, Saskatchewan.
I am a young adult and would
like to affirm the young adult ministry that Wendy Harder has
organized in Saskatchewan. The churches should continue to seek
paid ministry now that Wendy has resigned.
I am concerned about the low number of young adults participating
in Mennonite churches (see article on Saskatchewan young adults,
Jan. 14, page 15). I did not say "decreasing" number
because this has been the case in our churches for some time.
It seems to me that adults ages 19-30 tend to opt out of church
altogether, only coming back after they have "settled"
with families and careers.
Some would say this is normal-the busy schedules of people unfettered
by family and business keeps them from involving themselves too
heavily in the local church so that they have the freedom to move
around as studies or employment opportunities demand.
I believe that this is not a sufficient reason to opt out of church
responsibility. It seems more likely that the role of the church
has changed. It has become a place that holds meaning for children
(Christian education via Sunday school), for youth (social learning
in the youth group), adults (family nurturing via worship) and
seniors (comfort and tradition sharing via pastoral care).
Young adults who stay in the church find themselves in an awkward
place. They are seeking their place in adulthood but still unable
to provide financially. They are in the process of realizing their
gifts, yet they often feel that there is no place for them in
the church.
I admit this might be overly generalized. I have not mentioned
the many young adults who have decided to involve themselves in
various ways. For them, I am thankful. In regards to the dilemma
I have described, my only hope is the memory of my experience.
I started playing guitar on the praise and worship team once a
month at the request of "John" in North Kildonan Mennonite
Church. At age 15, I felt that it was quite an honour to be asked
to share my gifts in worship. I was so thrilled I didn't even
think about the butterflies in my stomach when I was up front.
Slowly I became co-dependent with my congregation, and after I
was baptized my involvement with teaching junior high Sunday school
increased my co-dependency. The next step was working at camp
and going to Bible college. My dreams of becoming an auto mechanic
were laid aside as my passion to participate in church life increased.
During my college years, I was involved as a youth sponsor, while
continuing as Sunday school teacher and guitar player for worship.
Currently I have accepted a paid ministry as youth pastor at Rosthern
Mennonite Church.
The point is, what got me hooked on church was that members saw
the gifts I had and invited me to share them. Gift discernment
is not an official program in our church; it was the careful observation
of several adults that got the ball rolling. People need to open
their eyes to the wonderful gifts of the young people in their
church and then actively seek, on a person-to-person basis, to
invite them to share their gifts with the congregation.
We young adults need to be open to sharing our gifts, for in doing
so we help the church keep its vitality and faithfulness in mission
to all ages. The point is not to start another "gift discernment"
program; the change starts when we see that we are all gifted
people. I encourage congregations to diligently seek new and creative
ways to incorporate the gifts of young adults, and in doing so,
they will give young adults purpose and meaning in the body of
Christ.
-Marco Funk, Rosthern, Sask.
Thomas More also
had a dark side
I applaud the choice of Robert
Bolt's "A Man for All Seasons" as the Canadian Mennonite
University theatre debut. This play/movie still ranks as one of
my favourites. The behaviour and convictions of Thomas More stand
in stark contrast to those of other officials in the court of
Henry VIII.
However, there was a darker side to More. He was seen by contemporary
reformers (William Tyndale and John Foxe) as the cruellest of
all persecutors. The stories of More whipping heretics in his
garden may be exaggerated, but as Lord Chancellor he had more
responsibility than any other person in the persecution of heretics.
More asserted that the most "monstrous of all heretics were
the Anabaptists," who rejected infant baptism and believed
that worldly goods should be held in common (like the inhabitants
of More's Utopia!). His success in persecuting Anabaptists was
such that none established a permanent congregation in England
until some 70 years later.
There is a lesson in this: dogmatic convictions in faith, ethics
or politics are at best a diluted virtue unless tempered with
compassion and understanding of your opponents.
-Edward Bergen, Toronto, Ont.
Does Suderman agree
with Kraybill?
I read with great interest
the article, "Our future is evangelical" (Feb. 11, page
6). Kraybill's article is clear and written with sincerity through
experience and understanding. For me, Kraybill puts into focus
our Anabaptist roots.
In contrast I am not clear as to what the article, "Winning
and losing" by Robert J. Suderman (March 11, page 32), is
driving at. Is the long preamble to his conclusion an attempt
to reword the intent of the Kraybill article? Is Suderman raising
a red flag?
-Abram Dyck, Winnipeg, Man.
Copyright
for the contents of this page belongs to the Canadian Mennonite.
Please seek permission to reprint from the editor
.