MWR : The richness and pain of diversity

Last updated November 24.

Send letters to the editor, or suggestions for our stories or Web site, to MWR‘s editors.

April 13, 2009 issue

The richness and pain of diversity

An open letter by more than 100 people in Mennonite Church USA calling for confession and healing for what the writers call the exclusion of gay, lesbian, bisexual and transgendered people raises questions about how any group of Mennonites ought to handle theological diversity.

Leaders of conferences and constituency groups present at the Constituency Leaders Council meeting March 30-April 1 read the letter, many for the first time.

The executive committee of the Executive Board responded to the letter. They reminded leaders that we, as a church, have officially committed to continuing dialogue on this issue, while also declaring the denomination’s position.

At first, the CLC members were hesitant. In the second half of the gathering, they began to speak. Some acknowledged differences among conferences, and not just on the issue of sexuality. Some wondered how to keep the focus on what they hold in common, what all of us as Mennonites hold in common: love of Jesus and witness in an Anabaptist perspective.

An excellent question, though a difficult one. For those of us who are part of MC USA, the Confession of Faith in a Mennonite Perspective aims to describe our shared beliefs. Yet even with such a document, there are members of congregations, ministers and conference leaders who can’t agree with every article exactly as it is written.

Within MC USA, congregations and conferences also are not all of one mind on the issue of women in leadership, even though our ministerial guidelines call for gender equality in ministry.

We trust the congregational discernment that leads some to not accept women as pastors. We should also trust the discernment of congregations that welcome single and partnered gay, lesbian, bisexual and transgendered people as members.

We do not need to agree in order to trust and accept our brothers and sisters in Christ. On many issues of controversy, we maintain relationships of love and respect with those we believe are wrong.

Theological diversity adds richness to our fellowships. Our struggle to find the best way through our disagreements can also cause pain. Yet what unites us is much greater than what divides. We are all valuable parts of this one part of the body of Christ.

Among our Anabaptist denominations in North America, there is theological disagreement in many areas, yet we are valuable parts of the larger body.

We cooperate in serving the poor through Mennonite Central Committee and rebuilding devastated areas through Mennonite Disaster Service. At times, we study at the same schools and work on farms together.

Those experiences remind us that these matters are ultimately not about theological or biblical positions, but about people. In our frustration or anger we sometimes forget we are all children of God. As the old hymn says, “The ground is level at the foot of the cross.”

We can find loving ways to talk about our differences, even if we cannot resolve them. We can work together in the areas on which we agree as we each seek to follow Christ and love our neighbors.

— Celeste Kennel-Shank

Comments

Thanks, Celeste, for this gracious and encouraging perspective! I'm convinced that learning to love, trust and appreciate one another in diversity--theological and otherwise--is crucial for the viability of our communities.

- Forrest Moyer (apr 8 at 12:39 p.m.)
We are all children of God,created by God. Who are we to judge or turn away anyone who wants to worship God and be part of our church family.

- Joyce M Leasher (apr 10 at 11:44 a.m.)
The issue that is ignored in many of these discussions are those believers in our churches who have left the homosexual/lesbian lifestyle when they came to Christ and are now living in committed heterosexual relationships. They consider their past life to be sinful and truly believe that sexual relationships are to be confined to one man-one woman marital relationships, which seems to be the standard for New Testament Christianity. They are the silent voice that no one is hearing.

- Michael Hutchings (apr 13 at 4:27 p.m.)
I am sad to see such a non-biblical approach to women pastors and homosexuals by the Mennonite leaders. This was not Jesus approach and so it should not be ours. Jesus example was to forgive those who repent of their sins and confront in love those who do not repent. Homosexuality is clearly a sin by God's standard and we should follow Jesus example, love them, but also confront them and help them turn from their sin to God. Our beliefs and convictions should be Bible based, and your response sounds more like it's based on the world's ideas. This is not a difference of opinion, it is a turning away from the truth of the Bible.

- Susan (apr 17 at 12:26 a.m.)
To clarify, in case I confused Susan or anyone else, the Mennonite Church USA denominational position is that marriage is between one man and one woman. This editorial describes a conversation among Mennonite leaders that I observed, but the rest is my opinions as one Mennonite. I was pointing to the issue of women in leadership as one in which the congregations and conferences of MC USA have modeled some ability to live with disagreement on what the Bible teaches and God desires.

That is also part of the conflict over sexuality: Mennonites who have Bible-based convictions and beliefs still disagree on what the Bible and God say. Do we value being part of larger fellowships such as a conference or denomination enough to stay together with all of our differences?

- Celeste Kennel-Shank (apr 20 at 9:46 a.m.)
Since this discussion is still ongoing, my question to all those who signed and support 'The Open Letter', does the Radical Hospitality of Jesus theology include the acceptance of polygamy? If not, why not? Perhaps this may have been an oversight that needs to be corrected to be fully inclusive and not discriminate in any way. It was practiced in the Old Testament. It is my understanding there are those who still practice this but very discreetly, so as to avoid condemnation.

- A. Dale Welty (apr 22 at 4:29 p.m.)

Comment on the article The richness and pain of diversity

The purpose of comments is to engage in dialogue. We expect commenters to treat authors and each other as each would want to be treated. Respectful criticism is welcomed; offensive comments or parts of comments will be removed by the site administrator. Name and comment will be posted; email address is for follow-up only and will not be made public.