June 6, 2011 issue
Inclusion is encouraging
By Jean E. Snyder PittsburghI was thrilled to read of the strong support of Goshen College students for gay and lesbian faculty and staff and that a pastor who performed a same-sex commitment ceremony had not been disciplined (May 23). It is encouraging to see these signs of hope that some in the Mennonite church understand that God’s creation includes our gloriously complex sexual natures, which cannot be stuffed into two little boxes marked “masculine” and “feminine” without serious violation of the law of love and of understanding that the mystery of sexuality is far more fluid than many of us have understood.
As there is no open and affirming Mennonite congregation in western Pennsylvania, my husband and I have affiliated with a wonderful Evangelical Lutheran congregation that welcomes and affirms everyone. It is full of people of all ages, economic status and ethnic backgrounds, including many young families who want their children to be nurtured in a community that honors the dignity and personhood of all. I wish that could be said of the Mennonite congregations near us.
Comments
-
Jean, I am acquainted with a woman who is twice divorced and then was shacked up with a man for a year or two. During this time, she was also on the elder board of her loving and inclusive church as a member in good standing. This sounds like a church that would appeal to you.
BTW, she has since seen the error of her way.
-
Cousin Dale, here are some people I have known, two women and one man -- heterosexuals all, like the woman you describe here.
1) I knew a woman who eloped with her first cousin. Their first child was born seven months later, to the day. He was not premature. She and her husband were prominently active in their church for the rest of their lives.
2) I knew a woman who fell in love with the boy on the next farm, but he was of a "different faith," so they were forbidden by both sets of parents to see each other. Nevertheless, they did see each other and she bore a child. It took eight years for a man to come along and marry her. She was disciplined by the Old Order church she belonged to but was accepted by a church down the road, where she spent many years as superintendent of the primary Sunday School.
3) I knew a man whose first wife died after she had borne him ten children. He met a widow with three children of her own. They married, and their first child was born seven months later; he was not premature. This man was active in his church throughout his life.
The first woman was your paternal grandmother, and my aunt. The second woman was her sister, my mother and your great-aunt. The man was brother to the two sisters, therefore my uncle and your great-uncle.
For the two women the church in question, the one that received them forgivingly and made grateful use of their gifts, was the one you and I grew up in and of which I believe you may still be a member. For the man the church was one that shared a bishop with their church. The fact that they were accepted as graciously as they were probably has a lot to do with the fact that their stories could be replicated by many people in their respective congregations. The ones I describe here have long since gone to their reward, and I have no doubt that they are as active in heaven as they were in their churches here on earth.
If you're trying to make some point about churches that lovingly include gay and lesbian people in their number being somehow more "sinful" or less moral than churches that exclude them, you're failing badly. You are, however, laying the groundwork for a case that heterosexuals need to be very carefully monitored because they seem so prone to yield to their physical desires, in spite of all the rules laid down against doing so.
Dale, you have become so predictable. People now read an article or a blog post or a letter in MWR on line that so much as mentions the words "gay" or "lesbian" and begin the countdown: negative response from Dale Welty in 4 - 3 - 2 - 1.... I suggest it's really time for you to get a life.
-
Lin, I am repeating the last line of my note to Jean, "BTW, she has since seen the error of her way."
At this point, I have no basis for comment on other things you have stated.
My wife and I attend an Anabaptist church. Anybody who wants to sit in the auditorium for the service is welcomed. You will not be asked to submit an admitance form in advance to be seated. This is an open invitation to you to attend a service and to sit with my wife and I as our guest.
Each Sunday, the pastor issues an altar call for anyone who wants to take that step of faith and accept Jesus as Lord and Savior. If a person takes that step of faith at the altar call or after the dismissal of the service, the person becomes a new creature in Christ. Old things are passed away to be replaced with the desire for new things.
All pews have a visitors card. All visitors are invited to complete a visitors card as a record of their attendance and to deposit it in the offering plate as it passes. On that card, you may indicate a desire to have a pastoral visit.
If you attend during communion, you are invited to participate with the cup and bread on the basis you have a right relationship with God and you are not under the discipline of another church.
If, after a period of steady attendance, you decide you want to become a member. You will be interviewed by the deacon board. The results of that interview will determine if your application for membership is accepted.
I accept the teaching of the Bible. If that makes me predictable, as you state, I accept that as a compliment.
BTW, there is a MYF reunion August 21 at noon at the Salem fellowship hall. Consider this as an invitation to you to attend. You are also welcome to join my wife and I at the morning service of the church we now attend.
-
I suggest that there is a difference between welcoming and affirming a person and blessing all their actions and behaviors. People chose to do lots of things which I do not want to blame God for or imply that because the people are involved in behaviors means that God desires them to do them. This approach seems to end up endorsing a lot of perversion; we end up justifying anything and everything. I like the song line: " if we do not stand for something, then we all die for nothing."
-
Debating this issue, mostly via internet, has been a troubling and unsettling experience. Having attended Pittsburgh 2011 and witnessing first hand the overt presence of the Pink Mennos has further exacerbated this frustration. It's not easy to dialog given my personality causes me to respond firmly and sometimes indignantly on this issue so I did not participate in the conversation room meetings. I speak my mind and some take offense. Understand I harbor NO hatred for our LGBTs brothers and sisters but, as a staunch, unyielding opponent of inclusion of what I perceive as persons in direct conflict of God's perfect plan for our sexuality, I'm asking, just exactly do you want us, who object, to do? Should MCUSA eventually vote for inclusion of LGBT's, what choice will we have? We are forced to suck it up or walk away. There is no middle ground regarding this issue for those who feel as I do. So we continue to voice our resistance, attempting to do so in love and with grace, while the Pink Mennos and Gay Mennonite league persist in pushing us to change our stance on the gay issue. The question whether the Bible condemns or approves of gay relationships is a subject that has been beaten to pieces and to quote scripture that backs my beliefs would only generate rebuttal. The concept of an all inclusice church is illogical. Should MCUSA move to approve inclusion, my feeling is that those who resist will have no other choice than to walk away from the denomination we dearly love. Those left will be LGBTs, their allies and advocates and those who are indifferent. Should we choose to stay and continue to voice our resistance what would be the response? We can agree on one fact. God's Truth is unchanging and justice will be served!
-
John. You wrote that to quote Scripture that supports what you believe would only generate rebuttal. I would encourage you to go ahead and quote Scripture. That is our tool to convince. If others rebutt what you quote, then we can take a look at the ways Scriptures are interpreted, accepted, or rejected. We can get an idea of what presuppositions, etc, are being relied upon, if we are dealing with post modernism, and so forth. Hopefully we can then convince others of what is the position that the church should take on various issues, and even of what is authoritative.
-
Also, hearing rebuttals can cause us to look at the Scriptures more closely and state more clearly, or with further reasoning, what we believe.
-
Okay, Daniel, here it is. Romans 1:26-27: "For this reason God gave them up to VILE PASSIONS. For even their women exchanged the natural use for what is AGAINST NATURE. Likewise also the men, leaving the natural use of the woman, burned in their lust for one another, men with men committing what is SHAMEFUL, and receiving in themselves the penalty of their error which was due." Based on this passage, a look at our anatomy and the fact that God created all that is natural including our sexuality, homosexuality is unnatural. I don't think it could be any clearer. Here's another angle, Genesis 1:26-28 So God created man in His own image, in the image of God He created him; male and female He created them. And God blessed them, and God said to them, "Be fruitful and multiply... How many gay couples have been able to follow that command. From the beginning it has been MALE AND FEMALE. I have not been educated as some in the subject of human sexuality, genetics, the workings of the brain and I don't understand homosexuality but it is my belief that God truly is "giving them up to vile and unnatural passions" I believe he who can appear as an angel of light is using the same deception he used in the Garden of Eden to fool Adam and Eve. I believe some have become so open-minded that they will grab on to anything that seems to support their beliefs. As I've stated in other comments, there is a reason the leaders of MCUSA have and continue to exclude gays No matter what future leaders decide on the issue, that reason will still stand. THIS I believe.
Comment on the article Inclusion is encouraging
Please keep comments civil. MWR editors reserve the right to remove any comment. When posting a comment, you agree to the MWR Comments Policy. Name and comment will be posted; commenters are strongly encouraged to give their full name. Email address is for follow-up only and will not be made public.
Download