Farewell, MCUSA

[temporal1]

Delegates repeal Membership Guidelines, pass LGBTQ-affirming resolution
‘Repentance and Transformation’ passes with 55.7% support
This is unsurprising and terribly sad for me.

Sad for me too. The article doesn't point to the resolution itself, here it is:

https://www.mennoniteusa.org/wp-content ... ev-2.0.pdf

It seems to say anyone who believes the traditional interpretation of the Bible and wants to obey it is sinful and at odds with Jesus and needs to repent. That people like me are rejecting the Good News of "grace, joy, and peace".

This goes beyond what I have seen in other denominations that changed their beliefs. It seems to stomp on those who disagree with them. It seems to say that people like me are the real sinners.

Drugs (and toxins) in the water supply.

Pharmaceuticals in Water
http://www.usgs.gov/special-topics/wate ... cals-water

[Soloist]

its hard to find reputable studies on the pharmaceuticals in the water... We also have plastic that mimics estrogen so... lots of interacting factors that could be connected. The simple end result though is that people can be predisposed to certain sins, but that does not mean the sin is irresistible.

[Josh]

[

It can be. How much is "enough"? I have some Menno relatives who own large business. One cousin, for example, owns fleets of trucks and a construction business and seems to spend 60-70 hours a week running and building the businesses instead of time with his family and doing God's work. He is successful and they keep expanding and taking on more. I have no idea what his financials look like but the value of the businesses is probably pushing 8 figures by now.

My point isn't to criticize him. But to point out that I think there is a lot of hypocrisy when we pick and choose which sins to make a stand over. Jesus didn't say that gays won't enter the Kingdom of God. He said the rich man won't enter the Kingdom of God. There are a lot of very rich Mennonites out there. And we tend to put them into positions of respect and authority. And use all kinds of euphemisms to talk around the subject rather than the correct words like "rich man" and "greed".

I am loosely following this thread, so I am no expert. But Ken makes a good point. We tend to cherry pick what's a super huge big deal and what is not. I've heard it preached over the pulpit numerous times that it is good for a man to be "industrious" often at the expense of family time. That never ends well... I learned that lesson the hard way...

I have much more often heard the caution that family time is worth more than money and that it would be better to pass up opportunities to make a lot of money if they will interfere with a father's ability to be home with his family daily.

Same here. I have heard revival sermons telling the audience that perhaps God wants them to shrink down a “big operation” or empty out a savings account.

As far as men being looked down for not working enough? That threshold in my experience concerns men who no show to the job a lot, etc., don’t save anything and instead spend it on eating out and so on.

Or a young man discouraged from marrying because he was earning under $15,000 a year. I’m still not sure how I felt about that but it does seem to be sound advice.

It may be different in other settings like Steve’s where the pressure exists, I just agree with ken_s that I’ve heard far more pressure about the opposite.

[Josh]

Delegates repeal Membership Guidelines, pass LGBTQ-affirming resolution
‘Repentance and Transformation’ passes with 55.7% support

This is unsurprising and terribly sad for me.

Sad for me too. The article doesn't point to the resolution itself, here it is:

https://www.mennoniteusa.org/wp-content ... ev-2.0.pdf

It seems to say anyone who believes the traditional interpretation of the Bible and wants to obey it is sinful and at odds with Jesus and needs to repent. That people like me are rejecting the Good News of "grace, joy, and peace".

This goes beyond what I have seen in other denominations that changed their beliefs. It seems to stomp on those who disagree with them. It seems to say that people like me are the real sinners.

It only passed with 55%, which represents a departure from the way Mennonites (and MC USA in particular) did things - which was to forbear with one another when there isn’t a clear consensus.

A 55% resolution basically condemning the 45% who voted against it is not how we have typically functioned, other than in very divisive splinter groups.

[GaryK]

The Bible talks about fornication and wanton behavior and being unfaithful to each other and being captive to our lusts. I don't have time to dig into all the texts but we all know they are there. I'm just saying I don't hold gay people to any higher standard than straight people. I have a 16 year old daughter and she had better not be sleeping around and I'm pretty sure she isn't but parent's don't always know. But she has a good head on her shoulders and I trust her. On the other hand, my 24 year old daughter has been living on her own for 6 years. She's active in her church and has a variety of boyfriends over the years. Do I know everything she has ever done with any of them? No, and I really don't care to either. I assume she's been a good kid but parents don't always know. We did our best to raise her with good values and that is all you can do. Is being intimate with her boyfriend the worst thing she can do? No, not hardly. I wouldn't necessarily approve, but in the grand scheme of things I would be less bothered by that than if she got involved in thievery or working for some business that exploited and harmed others, or any hundreds of other things that she might get sucked into. I hold gay people to that same standard. I don't necessarily approve but I'm not scandalized by it either. And there are far worse things they can get sucked into than a little intimacy with their boyfriend/girlfriend.

I have taught HS for a long time and in some pretty evangelical parts of the country and I can tell you that kids both gay and straight are pretty busy being intimate with each other everywhere. In Baptist world there are a lot of girls who are "saving themselves for marriage" by being intimate in every way possible but ordinary "missionary" sex. Because they have come to believe or have talked themselves into the notion at as long as they don't do vaginal sex they are still virgins. Are they sinning? Probably. Is it the worst sin ever? No. Are they still active in their churches and church youth groups? Yes, that is actually where some of it happens. So gay kids doing the same exact thing that straight kids have literally been doing since the dawn of time? Shrug. If that is the worst sin they ever do we are probably going to be OK. It isn't something I think it is worth tearing churches apart over. And if the Catholic Inquisition couldn't stamp it out using Medieval torture and burning people at the stake I don't think old people being disapproving is going to do it either.

So just because it may not be the worst sin ever, should churches affirm those sins? I believe anytime churches begin affirming or approving of things the Bible clearly calls sin, those churches are in danger of having their candlesticks removed, as the Revelation warns.

No, honestly not. I'm not big into all this pride stuff and affirmation stuff either for straight folks or gay folks or LGBT folks or whoever. I don't think it really belongs in church. I just don't think that gay folks who fool around outside of marriage are any bigger sinners than straight folks who do exactly the same thing. And if gay folks want to get married they should be held to the same standards and expectations as straight folks.

Gay folks are going to be in your families and in your churches. That is inevitable. It is going to happen. It is unrealistic and utterly hypocritical to expect them to live like monks or cloistered nuns when we don't have that same expectation for everyone else. Maybe it was 50 or 100 years ago when there was enormous societal stigma. But not today. So either you drive them out of your families and churches or accept the fact that they are part of who we are as families and churches. I ask myself what would Jesus do and come to the latter conclusion. Obviously that is not a conclusion shared by the majority here.

I think churches should expect their members to live according to NT Kingdom principles and commands regardless their sexual orientation. Otherwise, you get to what's happening in MCUSA and many other denominations. Jesus will have the final say, so I'm inclined to take seriously what His Kingdom requires. Bowing to cultural changes that affirm sin is a sure way for churches to have their candlesticks removed by Jesus.

[HondurasKeiser]

Delegates repeal Membership Guidelines, pass LGBTQ-affirming resolution
‘Repentance and Transformation’ passes with 55.7% support

This is unsurprising and terribly sad for me.

Sad for me too. The article doesn't point to the resolution itself, here it is:

https://www.mennoniteusa.org/wp-content ... ev-2.0.pdf

It seems to say anyone who believes the traditional interpretation of the Bible and wants to obey it is sinful and at odds with Jesus and needs to repent. That people like me are rejecting the Good News of "grace, joy, and peace".

This goes beyond what I have seen in other denominations that changed their beliefs. It seems to stomp on those who disagree with them. It seems to say that people like me are the real sinners.

It only passed with 55%, which represents a departure from the way Mennonites (and MC USA in particular) did things - which was to forbear with one another when there isn’t a clear consensus.

A 55% resolution basically condemning the 45% who voted against it is not how we have typically functioned, other than in very divisive splinter groups.

That's an interesting point with regards to 'consensus'. A concept I was never a fan of.

[Ernie]

I can't speak for the CA's here but my congregation would have no problem including in membership and communicating with (in the theological sense) gay folk that are celibate.

The only difference that most Plain conservative Anabaptists would make with this is that a person should not refer to himself as gay. Rather he should refer to himself as a person with homosexual temptations. We don't think a Christian man should refer to himself as an adulturer if he is tempted with having more than one partner. Now if he is nurturing these thoughts in his mind, and not attempting to resist them, he should not consider himself a Christian.

[Ernie]

Gay folks are going to be in your families and in your churches. That is inevitable. It is going to happen. It is unrealistic and utterly hypocritical to expect them to live like monks or cloistered nuns when we don't have that same expectation for everyone else.

Do you think it is unrealistic and utterly hypocritical to expect people who are tempted with gay inclinations to live celibately?

[Neto]

Gay folks are going to be in your families and in your churches. That is inevitable. It is going to happen. It is unrealistic and utterly hypocritical to expect them to live like monks or cloistered nuns when we don't have that same expectation for everyone else.

Do you think it is unrealistic and utterly hypocritical to expect people who are tempted with gay inclinations to live celibately?

I heard a talk by a former practicing lesbian who, after repenting and becoming a believer, eventually married, and had children with her husband. He knew before they married that she didn't experience a deep attraction toward him in a sexual way, and she admitted that she still felt attraction toward other women, but she had dedicated her life to follow in the way of Christ, so she pushed those feeling aside. She said that while she didn't feel the romantic (sexually charged) attraction for her husband that is commonly expected, she loved him, and was devoted and loyal to him, considering him her closest friend. Infatuations often don't last anyway, so a marriage needs to be founded on a DECISION, not a feeling of attraction, or "getting the butterflies".

[Ken]

Gay folks are going to be in your families and in your churches. That is inevitable. It is going to happen. It is unrealistic and utterly hypocritical to expect them to live like monks or cloistered nuns when we don't have that same expectation for everyone else.

Do you think it is unrealistic and utterly hypocritical to expect people who are tempted with gay inclinations to live celibately?

I don’t agree with your framing. My experience is that in most cases people are either gay or straight. They know it early in life and those orientations don’t change. So I don’t think people are “tempted with gay inclinations”. They either are gay or they are not.

And, in any event, sexual orientation and desire is about FAR FAR more than just the mechanics of sex. It’s about dating and having relationships and all those other parts of human interaction. The actual sex is often quite secondary. I have gay kids in my classes. They do all the same stuff as straight kids. They date, hold hands, text each other, hang out together, have crushes, and all the same ordinary stuff as all the straight kids. I expect many of them are not actually sexually active. So it is not actually about being celibate. It is more about being open or closeted about who you are.

So yes, I think it is unrealistic to expect gay folks to to live celibate and closeted lives in a world and community in which strait folks are not expected to do any of those things. You might have a few compliant and repressed souls who go along with it for a while and live pretend false lives. But eventually it all comes crashing down.

Do you have daughters? Do you want them to accidentally marry a repressed gay man who is desperately pretending to be straight? I have seen that happen on several occasions. The inevitable result is an eventual broken marriage when the pretending finally gets to be too much. But that is exactly what happens when you ask people to do that and live false lives.