Nov. 26, 2012 issue
Eastern District cuts ties with Germantown church
By Tim Huber Mennonite World ReviewEastern District Conference of Mennonite Church USA has discontinued its liaison relationship with Germantown (Pa.) Mennonite Church.
The decision came by delegate vote at the conference assembly’s Nov. 10 business session in Souderton, Pa. EDC executive conference minister Warren Tyson said delegates voted by a one-vote majority to discontinue the relationship.
The liaison relationship was established 10 years ago, when Germantown was removed from EDC over issues of homosexuality. As part of the transition, an agreement was reached in which the church would continue with more informal ties, and the matter would be reviewed by delegate vote every five years.
“We deeply grieve that Germantown Mennonite Church is no longer in dialogue with Eastern District Conference, and we pray for a day when the body will be one,” said Germantown Pastor Amy Yoder McGloughlin. “We continue to focus on the things we hold in common with the conference and denomination, even as we do what we feel God has called us to — welcoming all people, regardless of gender, race, ethnicity, sexual orientation and ability.”
Other aspects of the assembly, including workshops and worship, were held jointly with Franconia Mennonite Conference.
Comments
-
Incredibly sad and frustrating.
I do want to express (on behalf of the many Mennonites who are opposed to discrimination against our LGBT brothers and sisters in Christ) that the action of this one conference does not reflect the views of all of MCUSA.
I will continue to pray for the day that our church will repent of the sins of homophobia and exclusion.
James M. Branum Minister of Peace & Justice Joy Mennonite Church Oklahoma City, OK
-
I pray that someday we will have the courage to examine the logs in our own eyes. This issue we keep dividing over is blocking our sight from so many other key issues that separate us from full engagement with our Creator. Life as a LGBT is difficult. Let's not revert to old ways of handling conflict...we are better than this.
-
Personally, I don't think there's any virtue in unity for unity's sake. I've never believed that the church is the "body of christ" (which is a Pauline formulation, foreign to Jesus's teachings). So the "keeping the body whole" line of argument never worked for me. I think it's fine if some groups want to go their own way for their own reasons. Why not? Why should groups who are diametrically opposed on key issues remain under the same tent, only to struggle with each other endlessly? So what if MC-USA's membership numbers continue to decline? It's only a worldly institution. At the current rate of decline, MC-USA has but a few decades left anyway. Its disappearance would do no harm to God's kingdom, which exists and thrives not just despite institutional failures but often because of them. The anabaptist vision has been released into the world, and is now being carried by persons and groups far outside the Mennonite orbit. Even outside the orbit of traditional christianity.
But back to church splits: There is one Mennonite schism I could get excited about, and that would be something that might be called "The Welcoming Mennonite Church Conference," or "The Universal Mennonite Conference of Planet Earth," or "Radical Mennonite Affinity Groups North America" (just suggestions). Germantown Mennonite could be the founding congregation of this new entity, which would be a decentralized network, with no national structure, ever. Then once the network is formed, other liberal Mennonite groups around the world could join. And I think in short order you'd have something special: A lively network of progressive Mennonite churches that would be unencumbered by the old tradition-bound base that currently holds sway in MC-USA. (Hat tip to Heather Horst for the idea of a Germantown-initiated Mennonite conference.)
-
By Robin Schumacher
There are many in today’s culture that do not recognize the Bible as any kind of moral authority, especially on the matter of homosexuality. It should come as no surprise that atheists and skeptics hold this position; for example, the late Christopher Hitchens once remarked, “What do I care what some Bronze Age text says about homosexuality?” As noted apologist William Lane Craig has observed, “One of the best ways to defend the legitimacy of the homosexual lifestyle is to become an atheist.”
There are, however, a number of practicing homosexuals and activists who are not atheists and argue that the Bible legitimizes general homosexual behavior. Their core argument is that the Bible has been misunderstood and misinterpreted where homosexuality is concerned.
Let’s be honest: if they’re right, and God’s Word really does not condemn homosexual behavior, then a whole lot of angst and effort that’s occurring in churches and society could disappear in a flash. But the $64,000 question is, are they correct?
There are six primary passages of Scripture that reference homosexuality: Genesis 19:4-9; Leviticus 18:22, 20:13; Romans 1:24-27; 1 Corinthians 6:9-10; and 1 Timothy 1:9-10. Of these, I’ve personally seen more debate over the Romans passage than any other, with only the Genesis account of Sodom and Gomorrah coming close in regard to heated discussion.
Question: "Is it possible to be a gay Christian?"
Answer: “Do you not know that the unrighteous will not inherit the kingdom of God? Do not be deceived; neither fornicators, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor effeminate, nor homosexuals, nor thieves, nor the covetous, nor drunkards, nor revilers, nor swindlers, will inherit the kingdom of God” (1 Corinthians 6:9-10). There is a tendency to declare homosexuality as the worst of all sins. While it is undeniable, biblically speaking, that homosexuality is immoral and unnatural (Romans 1:26-27), in no sense does the Bible describe homosexuality as an unforgivable sin. Nor does the Bible teach that homosexuality is a sin Christians will never struggle against.
J B
-
Dear John Bickirt,
Do you accept the passage in 1 Corinthians 6:9-10 as authoritative? If Paul is correct that all those people (fornicators, adulterers, alcoholics, revilers, etc.) will "not inherit the kingdom of God" then the kingdom of God is a sparsely populated and lonely place indeed.
It seems clear that Paul's understanding of the kingdom of God is different from the way Jesus understood it. Paul seems to understand the kingdom as something that's coming down the road, in the future, and that it will be populated exclusively by christians, Paul's brand of christians.
Jesus, on the other hand, spoke of the kingdom as a state of being, a state of transformed consciousness, available here and now, in the present moment, to everybody. (Luke 17:21)
Once we recognize that the words of Paul do not equal the words of God, it becomes easier to read his letters and view much of them as the rantings of a fallible human being, who often got things wrong. Paul himself would be shocked to discover that his personal correspondence has been elevated to equal authority with the Hebrew scriptures. I'm sure he'd say to that: No way!
There's no virtue in insisting on the infallibility of Paul when it's clearly not merited. In fact, in one passage Paul tells his readers that the point he's making is his own opinion and not a word from the Lord. Doesn't that right there poke a hole in the notion that we must accept everything Paul says as divinely inspired?
-
Dear Charlie Kraybill,
Paul's Letters to the Corinthians and Timothy
Two of the verses in the New Testament that mention homosexuality are found in Paul's first letters to the Corinthians and Timothy: "Or do you not know that the unrighteous will not inherit the kingdom of God? Do not be deceived; neither fornicators, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor effeminate, nor homosexuals, nor thieves, nor the covetous, nor drunkards, nor revilers, nor swindlers, will inherit the kingdom of God." 1 Corinthians 6:9–10
"But we know that the Law is good, if one uses it lawfully, realizing the fact that law is not made for a righteous person, but for those who are lawless and rebellious, for the ungodly and sinners, for the unholy and profane, for those who kill their fathers or mothers, for murderers and immoral men and homosexuals and kidnappers and liars and perjurers, and whatever else is contrary to sound teaching, according to the glorious gospel of the blessed God, with which I have been entrusted." 1 Timothy 1:8–11
-
The Bible consistently tells us that homosexual activity is a sin (Genesis 19:1-13; Leviticus 18:22; 20:13; Romans 1:26-27; 1 Corinthians 6:9). Romans 1:26-27 teaches specifically that homosexuality is a result of denying and disobeying God. When people continue in sin and unbelief, God “gives them over” to even more wicked and depraved sin in order to show them the futility and hopelessness of life apart from God. 1 Corinthians 6:9 proclaims that homosexual “offenders” will not inherit the kingdom of God.
-
The arguements both ways have been aired over and over. Let us now put our differences of opinion & interpretation aside and work together to further God's kingdom. There is so much loving and sharing that needs to be done in our communities and our world. How can we do the Lord's work when we are constantly arguing and putting one another down? Time and love will bring us all to a clearer understanding of Truth.
-
We all remember the old poem about the six blind men and the elephant. Did you know there's a concluding verse entitled, "The Morale"?
So oft in theologic wars, the disputants, I ween, rail on in utter ignorance of what each other mean, and prate about an Elephant ot one of them has seen!
-
Dear John Bickirt,
There's a problem with your contention that "homosexuality is a result of denying and disobeying God." Modern science and modern medicine have proven that this is not the case. Homosexuality is not a result of denying or disobeying God. To the contrary, being gay is a natural, normal state. It is a gift from God. So the Bible is just wrong here. The book of Romans is wrong. Its author, Paul, is wrong. Let's get real: when it comes to a contradiction between modern science and a centuries-old book written in an age of superstition, which are you going to trust? That's a rhetorical question. The answer should be obvious.
-
Dear Charlie Kraybill
The Bible says what it says if you disagree that is up to you, it don't matter how you spin it it is what it is. If you disagree with the Eastern District Conference of Mennonite Church USA why can't you just go to a church that looks at the Bible the way you do........
-
Homosexuality is a "gift from God"? I don't know what to say. I'm so stunned I can't even process those words. It's unbelievable.
-
Wow, will we ever get over this issue? I suppose not. For the majority of Christians, homosexuality is one issue that holds no temptation, thus clamping down on it and separating over it provides a level of spiritual satisfaction. "Done! We conquered that one!" But do we cut ties with Mennonite churches that have drifted towards accepting militarism or consumerism, for instance? I wonder if a better solution is to allow individual congregations within Mennonite Church USA to come to their own (sometimes diverse) conclusions, but remain in fellowship together? That is common among some other denominations. Indeed, is it possible that separating from one another is a sin in and of itself? Our unity is centered around Jesus Christ and should not be defined by a sense of particular purity.
Comment on the article Eastern District cuts ties with Germantown church
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