We are people of God’s peace: Stories, sexuality, and conflict in the Mennonite Church

In the last year, two Mennonite churches licensed or hired LGBT pastors, sparking a flurry of vigorous debate over sexuality, and triggering the withdrawal of several congregations from the denomination. In this post, I want to reflect on ongoing conflicts over sexuality within Mennonite Church USA (MCUSA), using theories of worldview conflict, paradoxical curiosity, and narrative. I personally support full inclusion of LGBT Christians within the church, but I feel it is important for each of us explore other perspectives and reflect on how we relate together.

History

First, a little background for context. In 2002, MCUSA formed out of the merger of General Conference Mennonite Church (GCM) and Mennonite Church (MC), two denominations with distinct religious cultures and structures. According to the Global Anabaptist Mennonite Encyclopedia Online, GCM was regarded as less conservative and more assimilated into mainstream culture, with more autonomy for local congregations.1 MC was generally regarded as more conservative and nonconformist, with a more hierarchical authority structure as a denomination.2

Mennonites have traditionally been conservative about sexual issues, but both denominations have debated sexual orientation issues since the 1970’s. In recent decades, a growing number of congregations have welcomed LGBT members in committed relationships, and several have hired LGBT pastors. Several of these churches were censured or expelled by their area conferences, but other conferences are willing to accept divergent practices and views.3 In recent months, a few congregations withdrew their membership and others are exploring whether to leave MCUSA, because they feel it is too permissive of immoral sexual conduct and unscriptural teachings.4

Church leaders meeting to discuss alternative Anabaptist network to MCUSA. Photo credit: http://mennoworld.org/2015/01/23/new-group-to-offer-alternative-to-mennonite-church-usa/

Worldview and narratives

This is not simply a disagreement over sexuality, or a question to be solved through ‘rational’ debate; it reflects a deeper division over identity and ways of viewing the world, as illustrated by models in Jayne Docherty’s Learning Lessons from Waco. She suggests that groups define meaning through “worldmaking stories” about themselves and the world, which influence how they name conflicts, attribute blame, and frame desired outcomes.5

Those who want to welcome LGBT people as church members and clergy without restrictions and those who support the current teaching position that restricts membership of non-celibate LGBT people tell different stories about this conflict. Many supporters of LGBT inclusion describe it as a conflict about inclusion and equality; many supporters of the current position describe this as a conflict about faithfulness to scriptural/church teachings and moral purity.6

The symbolic and identity language used in this conflict offers light on defining narratives and ways of viewing the world. Many supporters of LGBT inclusion, including Pink Menno, emphasize a narrative that views the church as a diverse body that welcomes all people through grace, and lives in solidarity with the struggle of marginalized people.7 It is also a narrative of rejection and oppression that expresses hope for a more welcoming community.

Supporters of the current teaching position, such as Matt Hamsher8 and Jewel and Richard Showalter,9 express a narrative that stresses the church’s identity as a unified body committed to scriptural faithfulness and righteous living, in spite of pressure from worldly influences. It is a story of self-sacrifice and obedience to God, with the looming risk of moral erosion.

Both groups claim a legacy of victimhood, appealing to shared cultural narratives of religious persecution in Europe and North America. This victimhood mentality often leads to mistrust and self-righteousness. This fundamental disagreement about nature of the conflict creates a need to negotiate meaning, rather than just issues.

Values and sources of meaning

Pink Menno gathering at MCUSA national convention. Photo credit: http://media.mennoworld.org/media/uploads/images/2009/07/08/pink-menno.jpg

By comparing writings by advocates on both sides, including Jewel and Richard Showalter, Chester Wenger,10 Matt Hamsher, pastors from Ohio,11 and Pink Menno contributors, we can see different axiologies (values of what is important) and epistemologies (ways of discerning knowledge).

According to a recent survey by Conrad Kanagy, supporters of the current position tend to favor more denominational authority and want to uphold the historic teaching position as a denomination, even if it means losing congregations.12 Supporters of LGBT inclusion tend to support more local authority and are more willing accept divergent practices in MCUSA.

Supporters of the current position appeal to literal views of scripture and church tradition as sources of knowledge, along with church bylaws, experience, and occasionally social science. In addition, they privilege theological and ethical unity, deference to scriptural and church authority, sexual morality, and respect for tradition as important values.

In contrast, many supporters of LGBT membership appeal to personal experience as a source of knowledge, along with contextual views of scripture, church tradition, and social science. They often place more emphasis on diversity, personal discernment, being a welcoming community, and a balance between tradition and experience. There is considerable overlap and agreement between the two camps, but a difference in priorities.

Paradoxical curiousity

So how do we begin to engage this conflict in a way that recognizes these complex worldviews? In John Paul Lederach’s book The Moral Imagination, he describes paradoxical curiosity as an attitude toward conflict that has “an abiding respect for complexity, a refusal to fall prey to the pressures of forced dualistic categories of truth, and an inquisitiveness about what may hold together seemingly contradictory social energies into a greater whole.”13 By suspending judgement and embracing an imaginative curiosity while still holding on to core values, Mennonites might discover deeper shared truths about conflict and church identity that engage seemingly contradictory truths. This inquisitive engagement could create opportunities for new patterns and relationships, moving beyond mistrust and bitterness. Moral imagination transcends coercive power, and embraces the power of people working together and the power to create.

Embracing paradoxical curiosity and acknowledging different meaning-making narratives could lead to opportunities for reframing narratives among Mennonite churches and groups. In When Stories Clash: Addressing Conflict with Narrative Mediation, Gerald Monk and John Winslow describe this process as “focused on building relational narratives of increased understanding, respect and cooperation,” in addition to agreements.14

This path recognizes power dynamics and cultural forces, but believes that “Complexity is an ally .. because it always provides other possible pathways of response.”15 Perhaps dialogue and reframing could eventually lead to new insights about shared core values, mutual accountability, Biblical interpretation, sexual ethics, the role of diversity, and healthy ways of dealing with conflict.

We have an opportunity for imagination. What might this look like in practice?

Works Cited

1 Kaufman, Edmund G.and Henry Poettcker. (2009, November). General Conference Mennonite Church (GCM). Global Anabaptist Mennonite Encyclopedia Online. Retrieved from http://gameo.org/index.php?title=General_Conference_Mennonite_Church_(GCM)&oldid=121630.

2 Bender, Harold S.and Beulah Stauffer Hostetler. (2013, January). Mennonite Church (MC). Global Anabaptist Mennonite Encyclopedia Online. Retrieved from http://gameo.org/index.php?title=Mennonite_Church_(MC)&oldid=120422.

3 Johns, Loren. (n.d.) Homosexuality and the Mennonite Church. Retrieved 1 February 2015, from http://ljohns.ambs.edu/H&MC.htm

4 Yoder, Kelly. (2014, December 22). MC USA churches move in 2014. Mennonite World Review. Retrieved from http://mennoworld.org/2014/12/22/mc-usa-churches-move-in-2014/

5 Docherty, Jayne Seminare. (2001). Learning Lessons from Waco: When Parties Bring Their Gods to the Negotiation Table. Syracuse, NY: Syracuse University Press, p 62-64.

6 Harr, James, et al. (2014, February 5). Letter to Ohio Conference of Mennonite Church USA Leaders. Retreived from http://mennoworld.org/wp-content/uploads/2014/03/Ohio-letter.pdf

7 Pink Menno. (2014). Pink Menno Press. Retrieved from http://www.pinkmenno.org/pinkmennopress/

8 Hamsher, Matt. (2015, January 14). Survey results discouraging. The Mennonite. https://themennonite.org/opinion/survey-results-discouraging/

9 Showalter, Jewel and Showalter, Richard. (2014, November 14). An open letter to the Mennonite Church. Mennonite World Review. Retrieved from http://mennoworld.org/2014/11/14/to-our-beloved-mennonite-family/

10 Wenger, Chester. (2014, November 10). An open letter to my beloved Mennonite Church. Mennonite World Review.Retrieved from http://mennoworld.org/2014/11/10/an-open-letter-to-my-beloved-mennonite-church/

11 Harr, James, et al.

12 Kanagy, C. (2015). 2014 survey of credentialed leaders in Mennonite Church USA. Retrieved from http://www.mennoniteusa.org/survey-results/

13 Lederach, John Paul. (2005). The Moral Imagination: The art and soul of building peace. Oxford University Press, p 36.

14 Monk, Gerald and John Winslade. (2013). When stories clash: Addressing conflict with narrative mediation. A      Focus Book. Taos Institute Publications.

15 Ibid.

Advertisements

About Shalom Dreamers

I am a first year student in the Center for Justice and Peacebuilding at Eastern Mennonite University. My areas of interests incude restorative justice, civil rights, LGBT issues, ecology, community building, faith and spirituality, and ecclesiology.
This entry was posted in Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink.

One Response to We are people of God’s peace: Stories, sexuality, and conflict in the Mennonite Church

  1. Linda Rosenblum says:

    I think the point that the “pro-inclusion” (I hate the inclusive/exclusive language as it connotes that those who see homosexual behavior as wanting to close the door to anyone rather than inviting the sinners to come and be renewed) side completely misses is that the traditionally minded Mennonites see membership in the church (writ small like in a congregation or writ large like in a denomination) means that a covenanted relationship with individual accountability to one another has been made. By accepting membership, it is understood by the traditionalists (or whatever term you want to use) that you have covenanted with every other member in the Mennonite church that you accept the Confession of Faith and other church documents. I have had a conversation with an “inclusive” pastor who suggested that the Confession of Faith did not equate to a “creed” but are more like “things some of us believe”. Therein lies the rub. The traditionalists have entered into a covenanted relationship that the other members don’t feel bound to. There can never in a traditionalists point-of-view be a way to allow differing perspectives on what is defined as sin by scripture since they believe that everyone joining into the relationship has already acknowledged their adherence to the Confession of Faith. Breaking away from those agreed upon statements is equivalent to breaking one’s marriage vows. There is an unequal relationship. The traditionalist fully expects to be held to the Confession of Faith by the other members and the progressive doesn’t. They cannot simply “agree to disagree.”

    Liked by 1 person

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s