From Our Readers

Safe Driving

Please accept my compliments on your recent articles on “Safe Driving.” (January 8, 1988) I would have appreciated your mentioning other dangers, for instance, smoking when driving, the use of various drugs, and in particular those included in some prescribed medicines, all of which reduce the driver’s mastery of his car. Also, a warning should definitely be given concerning other factors, such as a lack of sleep, heavy meals with or without plenty of drink, family quarrels, films showing fast driving, bad eyesight, and lack of exercise.

R. G., France

While some of the things mentioned above were commented on in our articles, they bear repeating. Safe driving requires that the driver be completely alert to what is taking place on the road, enabling him to react quickly to any situation that may arise.​—ED.

While your article promoted good, safe driving, I was surprised that you did not recommend ‘buckling up.’ It too should be a safe driving habit. In your article “Why Fasten Your Seat Belt?” (June 8, 1978), you cited a Canadian report that concluded that ‘a belted driver’s survival chances in a collision are ten times higher than an unbelted driver’s,’ and a Swedish report that concluded “that belted people received about half as many injuries as unbelted persons at all speeds.”

C. S., United States

We wholeheartedly agree on the vital importance of using seat belts. This is required by law in many states and countries, and all of us, no matter where we are, should take this reasonable safety precaution out of respect for the gift of life.​—ED.

Liberation Theology

In your issue on “Liberation Theology” (November 8, 1987), you published an illustration that defames the Catholic Church, and it offends me to see a cross represented in the form of machine guns. This dishonors the cross on which our Savior, Jesus Christ, was crucified.

J. V., United States

The showing of guns in the form of a cross is a striking symbol of the ultimate consequence of liberation theology, which claims that it is Christian, as a last resort, to use violence to liberate the oppressed. It is not our printing of this symbol that dishonors Christ; rather, it is the action taken by those who advocate armed violence in the name of Christ that dishonors him. The methods of liberation theology are contrary to the teachings of Jesus. He stated: “My kingdom is no part of this world. If my kingdom were part of this world, my attendants would have fought that I should not be delivered up to the Jews. But, as it is, my kingdom is not from this source.” (John 18:36) He taught his followers: “All those who take the sword will perish by the sword.” (Matthew 26:52) He advocated respect for existing governments, stating: “Pay back, therefore, Caesar’s things to Caesar, but God’s things to God.” (Matthew 22:21) And he taught his followers to look to God’s Kingdom, not human efforts, to bring relief from oppression. (Matthew 6:9, 10; Psalm 72:1, 2, 4, 11-14) It is by following these teachings that we honor Jesus Christ.​—ED.