I am pleased that time has been set aside at the congregation's AGM for members and adherents to speak with each other and make a decision about the
statement that has been proposed by CMC and Ministry Team. I have a couple of
suggestions for amendments/improvements. Because it is not clear how much time for
discussion will actually be available at the meeting, I am posting the proposals in the hope of getting constructive feedback in advance.
THE STATEMENT: At Waterloo North Mennonite Church we
welcome all people to participate in our Christian community of faith with all
its expectations, responsibilities, and opportunities regardless of their race,
ethnic background, gender, age, sexual orientation, income, education, ability
or any other factors that give rise to discrimination and marginalization.
PROPOSAL #1: Delete
the reference to "age" from the statement.
Reason: The
Mennonite/Anabaptist movement began with an act of discrimination based on age.
For various reasons, Mennonites do not baptize individuals until they are of
the age of accountability (and children are not full participants in communion). I am sure it is not
intended by anyone that this statement should be interpreted to reverse that
core element of Mennonite practice. It might be possible to craft exceptions or
qualifications to address this issue. However, given that "age" has
not been a live issue in this series of discussions, it would be simplest to
remove the reference.
PROPOSAL #2: Add the following clarification to the end
of the statement: "This means a request to be married should not be
rejected on the basis that it is submitted by a same-sex couple."
Reason: The
core issue that has driven the debate and the development of the statement is
the question of marriage. The congregation ought to specifically address the
issue. The statement should be crystal clear on the question. Most importantly,
same-sex couples, should they wish to be part of the congregation, or wish to
be married at the congregation, should not be left guessing as to whether their
sexual orientation will be an issue.
POSTSCRIPT: I
actually have serious reservations about the overall approach of the statement
(See my June 15, 2015 blog post: Next
Mennonite? Century). However, it is high time something clear, concise and
public was said by our congregation about same-sex marriage. That means that if
something along the lines of Proposal #2 is included, I will likely support the
statement.
Russ, thanks (as always) for your thoughtful advocacy of principled Christian thought from a Mennonite perspective.
ReplyDeleteLikewise, I’m thrilled that our congregation will discuss once more and (finally) make a decision on the proposed “Statement of Welcome and Inclusion” this Sunday. This day has been a LONG, LONG time coming, and I’m grateful that we have been openly discussing how we do (or don’t) welcome those of us who are not conventionally sexually oriented.
I interpret your Proposal #1 as a minor quibble. You are correct in identifying our denominational assumption that participants can become members only after a certain age. As the Welcome Statement includes the fudge-factor “participate . . . with all of [our church’s] expectations . . . ,” I don’t think this denominational assumption is threatened. More significantly, I interpret the Welcome Statement as a celebratory declaration, opening our arms wide, and as such I find the reference to age not inappropriate. (For example, one could see it as affirming that toddlers and children ARE welcome in our worship services.) I would be disappointed if we removed the reference to age.
Your Proposal #2 is much more interesting to me. I share your wish that WNMC reach the point where we affirm, clearly and publicly, our corporate approval of loving, committed same-sex Christian marriages. You (and I, and others) have clearly communicated this desire to church leadership and members of Ministry Team. After much consultation with the congregation, thought and prayer, their recommendation falls short of such a declaration. The question is: should we oppose the proposed Welcome Statement because of what it doesn’t contain, or celebrate what it does accomplish?
And let me be clear: as I read the Welcome Statement, it does NOT affirm our corporate approval of loving, committed same-sex Christian marriages. (The same fudge-factor mentioned above seems to apply here too.) Thus your Proposal #2, as I see it, seeks to materially change the meaning and impact of the Welcome Statement.
Even though I agree with your desire to improve the Welcome Statement, and your reasons for it, I hope that you don’t provoke a vote on your Proposal #2 at the AGM. I suspect a fairly large portion of the congregation would not welcome it at this time, in part because we will not have had the opportunity to fully process its meaning and consequences. Could I suggest that you (and others; I will join you) engineer a Sunday school hour, or series, in the coming year in which we study the theology of marriage and lead the congregation in a discussion of loving, committed same-sex Christian marriages?
Ultimately, I hope that on Sunday we can celebrate the significant achievement of adopting (by an overwhelming margin?) a Welcoming Statement that signals to ourselves and our conference our understanding of same-sex orientation, and helps steer us on a path toward further celebrations on the topic of loving, committed same-sex Christian marriages.
Postscript: Russ and I had a wonderful, far-ranging phone conversation after I posted my comment. One outcome was the following brainstorming: in place of Russ's Proposal #2, consider
DeleteProposal #3: That WNMC commit itself to study and discuss, over the course of the coming year, the issue of same-sex marriage, with the aim to arrive at a clear statement of our church's position on this issue by this time next year.
I think that this is a question the congregation could realistically entertain without prior processing. I offer it as an alternative, and will be delighted if it is considered at the AGM (which I'll miss as Lorrie and I will be walking the streets of Lloret de Mar, Spain). Peace.