The editorial written by Robert Rhodes and Paul Schrag for the December 8th issue of the Mennonite Weekly Review -- an inter-Mennonite newspaper -- is entitled “Church should stand firm on marriage.” (The article is not yet archived.) This provides an interesting note on the conflict now raging in American culture.
This message of opposition to gay marriage is not addressed to the wider society, but only to the church: “Though much sound and fury will be expended, we must remember that the courts can define marriage only in a secular sense. They cannot change how churches define it. And though many Christians disagree with the Massachusetts ruling, we would do well simply to stand on our own teaching instead of asserting that the law must conform to our beliefs.”
How distinctly and uniquely Mennonite!
As one who grew up in a rural Mennonite congregation and community -- though I’m now a member of the First Presbyterian Church of Hollywood -- I can tell you that though many Mennonites around the country are quite conservative in their personal cultural and religious views: the editorials in the Review have for some time now been quite leftist in their politics -- sometimes even to the extreme. The views have been so radical in recent years that they cannot be considered representative of normal Mennonite practice. But apparently many Mennonite individuals and congregations today -- especially those in the Baby-Boom generation and those within the intellectual leadership of Mennonite publications -- are moving in the direction of the liberalism of the “mainstream” Protestant churches.
But it’s interesting to see that on this issue of gay marriage -- Mennonite thought is still traditional.
Here’s some more from this uncommonly perceptive editorial:
“Despite the churches’ witness, it seems likely that people of the same gender eventually will gain the legal right to enter a covenant that mirrors the bond of traditional marriage. If for no other reason, this will happen because the American public simply will have grown tolerant of such unions and tired of denying them to the very vocal groups who espouse them. In essence, the matter will be reduced to granting a civil privilege, without approving of a lifestyle or sexual practice.
“Loud and vigorous disputes will arise, partly because the issue doubles as a handy political grenade, one often wielded by those who purport to speak for conservative Christianity. Yet Christians who hold a conservative theology of marriage need not join the chorus heralding civilization’s downfall. No court ruling or legislative action can ‘undermine traditional marriage.’ Traditional marriage, defined by Scripture and the church, will continue to be as strong, or as weak, as traditional married couples make it.”
Without, myself, taking a stand, here -- on the issue of gay marriage for American society as a whole -- I would say this editorial makes some unusually wise and nuanced observations.
Posted by Rick Penner at February 13, 2004 01:27 AM