A faction of MC USA's call to abolish the police

[Josh]

Robert,

Can you rename the thread to "A faction of MC USA's call to abolish the police"?

Then let's get back on track on discussing the curriculum itself. Let's even be open-minded to looking for good ideas, things we agree with, common ground, etc. instead of just levelling criticism. Shouldn't we be here to listen?

[Ken]

Rev. Florer-Bixler is just the facilitator. The curriculum is built with input from a variety of "experts", both within the denomination, and with outside resources.

This is MC USA's most significant work, made with a panel of well-credentialed experts, on the topics we keep hearing about over and over on MennoNet. So I think it's worth taking a look at this curriculum and seeing just what the experts end up saying.

I would never use this course for anything, and I don't think it represents "what the experts end up saying" - experts have a wide variety of opinions. It certainly does not represent my own views. I don't know that I would take a Sunday School class as the official doctrine of MC-USA, either.

This was written by people in one particular faction of MC-USA, I would consider them activists who are particularly political and liberal. I wish MC-USA had not published it. I don't know what happens to MC-USA in the coming years.

They are probably terrified of being accused of censorship and so are uncritically publishing stuff that hasn't necessarily been widely vetted. They have to decide whether official church organs are an open forum for anyone with a point of view, or whether they should adhere to specific church doctrine.

I expect they got out too far over their skis by publishing this as a "curriculum" which presupposes official concurrence, rather than an opinion piece which does not.

[Josh]

Can we please stick to talking about the curriculum itself?

If you want to talk about MC USA politics, or factions, or go criticise MC USA, make a different thread for that.

If you want to claim this isn't official MC USA curriculum or doctrine, make another thread for that. This was prominently featured in The Mennonite/Anabaptist World (the official magazine of the MC USA), and also on MC USA's homepage. It is being distributed to churches and has multiple MC USA pastors involved in producing and endorsing it. I feel comfortable sharing it here and discussing it as an official piece of curriculum from MC USA.

I also think we should actually listen to the curriculum, read it, discuss it, before we leap to criticising it or "shooting the messenger".

[Bootstrap]

Can we please stick to talking about the curriculum itself?

So far, everyone who has spoken, including me, seems to think this curriculum has little value. I have read through it in some detail. I would really rather discuss things that I think do have value.

And I think the politics are relevant. Especially since politics is what you want to talk about. This is a curriculum created by people who had to withdraw from the Virginia Conference because of their views on gay marriage, they are part of a progressive liberal and politicized faction that is trying to get the upper hand in the denomination. They may succeed.

But I don't want to be associated with their views.

[Josh]

Can we please stick to talking about the curriculum itself?

So far, everyone who has spoken, including me, seems to think this curriculum has little value. I have read through it in some detail. I would really rather discuss things that I think do have value.

And I think the politics are relevant. Especially since politics is what you want to talk about. This is a curriculum created by people who had to withdraw from the Virginia Conference because of their views on gay marriage, they are part of a progressive liberal and politicized faction that is trying to get the upper hand in the denomination. They may succeed.

But I don't want to be associated with their views.

Consider this the "By Their Words" thread, but for the liberal-progressive wing. This is what the denomination is outputting and recommending as curriculum. And I'm not even sure this curriculum is necessarily bad. I think there's a lot we could learn from some of it. Instead, there seems to be a consensus forming that this is an embarrassing thing certain folks would kind of like to just see go away.

If we're going to continue to have MennoNet being a forum to bash conservatives, let's take a look at what the opposite wing is offering. I think this curriculum needs to be taken seriously.

[appleman2006]

Thankfully the difference between what the "by thy words" people are describing and what this curriculum is promoting is almost "as far apart as the east is from the west". I think I can find some good solid ground in between that and not have to worry about slipping into either of those extremes.

[Ken]

Can we please stick to talking about the curriculum itself?

So far, everyone who has spoken, including me, seems to think this curriculum has little value. I have read through it in some detail. I would really rather discuss things that I think do have value.

And I think the politics are relevant. Especially since politics is what you want to talk about. This is a curriculum created by people who had to withdraw from the Virginia Conference because of their views on gay marriage, they are part of a progressive liberal and politicized faction that is trying to get the upper hand in the denomination. They may succeed.

But I don't want to be associated with their views.

Consider this the "By Their Words" thread, but for the liberal-progressive wing. This is what the denomination is outputting and recommending as curriculum. And I'm not even sure this curriculum is necessarily bad. I think there's a lot we could learn from some of it. Instead, there seems to be a consensus forming that this is an embarrassing thing certain folks would kind of like to just see go away.

If we're going to continue to have MennoNet being a forum to bash conservatives, let's take a look at what the opposite wing is offering. I think this curriculum needs to be taken seriously.

I think they are on target with some of their material on the history of policing. One can indeed find roots of American policing in the slave patrols of the 19th Century. But I think the modern 2021 notion of abolishing policing is wrong headed and not remotely supported by most Black and Hispanic folks who generally suffer the most from crime.

As for being embarrassed by this? I’m not MCUSA anymore so I don’t have a stake in it. Personally I think this is kind of the lefty version of the flat earth firmament literalist stuff that some on the conservative side support. I think both are equally misguided.

That is not to say that I don’t think policing is in need of reform. It is. Just like most institutions in our society both public and private. Just because the American health care system is in crisis doesn’t mean we abolish hospitals or the medical profession. I view policing the same way

[Szdfan]

I know both Melissa and Isaac, though not well. I probably would not have used this curriculum when I was a pastor, because I tried to stay clear of partisan political things in my congregation. I received a lot of pressure from both sides.

I have my own complaints and issues with MCUSA, but I’m not really interested in discussing them on MN