InConversation 7-02

Some members of Mennonite Church Canada have expressed concern about Bill C-250, which protects groups from hate propaganda. The following is a guide for those who wish to write to the Justice Committee and their member of parliament.

Bill C-250 would amend section 318(4) of the Criminal Code that protects groups defined by colour, race, religion, and ethnic origin from hate propaganda. The amendment expands the list to include any “section of the public distinguished by sexual orientation.”

Several Christian organizations, including the Evangelical Fellowship of Canada (EFC), have expressed concerns. (The Canadian Council of Churches has not offered public comment.) Some fear that the effects of the bill may be broader than stated. The Bill might enable a court to rule that religious teachings against particular sexual activities is “hate propaganda.”

Mennonite Church Canada urges those thinking of writing letters to government officials to keep the following in mind:

1. Christians should be concerned about all expressions of hatred on any grounds. It is a shame against the Church of Jesus Christ that some people, claiming to speak as Christians, have said hateful things about gay, lesbian, bisexual and transgendered persons, and even committed violent acts against them. Our communications on this bill should be make clear our opposition to such behaviour.

2. Some people wonder whether the bill is necessary since we already have laws prohibiting slander, libel and assault. Those who have been verbally and physically attacked because of their sexual orientation or practices do not believe they receive adequate protection under current laws. One week before this Bill was introduced, on November 22, 2001, Aaron Webster, a gay man, was clubbed to death in Vancouver. This bill might not have prevented that but protection is a concern.

3. It is impossible to predict what unintended effects this Bill may have. Will it be used against Christians who voice a conviction that sexual relations outside marriage are immoral? Will it be used to prosecute groups that have such statements in their confessions of faith? Could the Bible be construed as “hate literature?” (Could the scriptures of other religions?)

The EFC elaborates: “Literature becomes hate propaganda if it is used by someone to promote hatred against an identifiable group. Leviticus 20:13 states, ‘If a man lies with a man as one lies with a woman, both of them have done what is detestable. They must be put to death; their blood will be on their own heads.’ If this text is used by someone to promote hatred, will the Bible itself be considered hate literature? And if this passage is read in a church, would it be considered ‘public incitement of hatred?’”

The EFC does not say that this is likely to happen. Dani Shaw, an evangelical lawyer writing in ChristianWeek (September 17, 2002) said this is “a little farfetched.” Ultimately, the effects depend on court rulings.

4. While we want our society to allow religious groups to follow their faith and to witness in public, there are limits to how our laws can reflect particular moral teachings. Further, we believe God has called Christians to ministries of reconciliation and compassion. We must not lose sight of the real life struggles of individuals. Let us use Scripture and our testimony of faith to incite understanding and compassion. Let us orient our perspective so that our minds are anchored in the Kingdom of God.

5. We can commit ourselves to a ministry of prayer:

•for those in leadership in our courts and parliament that they will rule with integrity;

•for those who represent the Christian perspective in the public square, that they will have divine wisdom and will represent Christ well;

•for those who have distorted God’s word to justify hatred;

•for those who have been victims of hatred because of their sexual orientation, that God will bring into their lives the message of healing and hope in Christ;

•for those who have opportunity to teach reconciliation, that they will grasp the extent of God’s love for all creation.

6. In addition to a ministry of prayer, individuals can write to the MPs who serve on the Justice Committee as well as to their own member of parliament. We suggest that letters include the following points:

a. We believe promoting hatred against anyone is wrong and we are not asking that the law allow people to do that;

b. We also believe that, in matters of sexual behaviour, religious and other groups should have the right to address what they see as morally right and wrong;

c. We hope the bill will not become law unless there are firm assurances that b (point above) is protected;

d. Our understanding is that currently there is doubt as to such protection.

MC Canada release, with Bill Janzen, Mennonite Central Committee Ottawa office. Resources from Evangelical Fellowship of Canada and Convention of Atlantic Baptist Churches. Find more at www.evangelicalfellowship.ca/social/initiatives.asp; and www.baptist-atlantic.ca/c415.html.

Christmas has come and gone, but the season’s gifts have left us a legacy that words just can’t describe. Since I’m paid by the word, however, I will make the attempt and tell you about my first—and most funnest—Christmas gift. (I’ve yet to receive any bonus dollars for good grammar.)

The making of my first Christmas gift started, as I discovered later from its creators, when I took a day off from school for some Mennonite R and R. (In other words, I did some work for Mennonite Church Manitoba.)

When I returned to my classroom, I noticed someone sitting at my desk.

“Who’s been sitting in MY chair?” I asked, in my best papa bear voice.

There was no response.

With the razor sharp logistical awareness so characteristic of English teachers, I realized why the figure was silent. It wasn’t real!

Proud of my deductive skills, I took a closer look. The figure was wearing a tweed cap that looked very much like one I’d lost several months earlier. The vest also looked familiar. The coffee cup the Mennonite mannequin held in its gloved hand was emblazoned with a “Timothy’s” logo, and the glasses perched on its cottony nose reminded me of my most recent pair.

I was beginning to put two and, um—what’s the other number? Oh, right! Two!—together.

My suspicions were further affirmed (swearing the oath being foreign to my Mennonite sensibilities) when I noticed that the Anabaptist effigy held a pen in the other hand, an instrument of peace poised over one of my just-purchased, el-cheapo journals. (I’m convinced that Mennonite heaven will feature street after street of “Buck or Two” stores.)

The final clues came in the Martyr’s Mirror, which was opened to a suitably grisly passage, and Hymnal: A Worship Book, opened to “What is this place?” I couldn’t have phrased the question better if I’d tried. Clearly, some staff members had been working hard to “share their faith.” What choice did I have save to make a joyful noise?

Right there, at 8:00 a.m. on a weary Friday, I began to laugh—deeply and refreshingly—until the tears came.

It took another two weeks for the guilty parties to ‘fess up, but they did so in the form of an exquisitely well-written short story, with such grace and joie de vivre that I shed a few more tears—this time because of the “we-know-you-but-love-you-anyway” acceptance richly recognizable between the lines.

—Tim Wiebe

Bashing government
not helpful either

Walter Bergen has written a challenging response (Dec. 2) to Aiden Schlichting Enns’ letter on capitalism. Bergen calls for “insightful reflection” and “informed debate” rather than “bashing” ideas such as capitalism.

I was surprised, therefore, to find in his letter statements like, “Governments never create wealth. They consume it” and “This government taxes working people unmercifully: modern-day serfdom.” Such clipped statements make effective drama. They hardly contribute to “informed debate.”

Isn’t government largely responsible for the country’s infrastructure which is essential to creating wealth? Before universal medicare, many people were bankrupted by illness. Isn’t the prevention of bankruptcy and its accompanying emotional trauma far more than “consumption?”

I’ve been led to believe that the opposite of government is anarchy. Some of my “working people” friends from Somalia, now living in Winnipeg, much prefer the “modern-day serfdom” here to what they left behind in Somalia.

Yes, I have my gripes about decisions made by my local, provincial and federal governments, but I fear that in countering what he calls “bashing” of church and capitalism, Bergen is playing the popular government-bashing game. More dialogue is required on the relative merits and dangers of capitalism and government.

—Jake Letkemann, Winnipeg, Man.

Discernment process
needs time limit

I suspect that large numbers of readers are sympathetic to one or the other of the views expressed by Hans Schemann and Gord Willms in the letters of the December 23 issue.

I agree with Schemann that we need closure on the homosexuality debate. No one issue should occupy so much time and energy. It is not, however, the role of the leadership to end this debate.

It is the responsibility of each congregation to discern what the Holy Spirit is saying. It is, I think, the role of provincial and national organizations to facilitate discussion between congregations, but each congregation needs to come to its own understanding before those discussions can take place. Some have done so.

Some congregations believe God accepts people with homosexual orientation and people with heterosexual orientation into congregations equally. Some congregations believe it is not possible to be a faithful Christian and a non-celibate homosexual. I am willing to accept that both views result from study and prayer. I am willing to accept both views are defensible from Scripture and from the lives of Christian disciples.

When all congregations finish their discernment on this issue, then our provincial and national bodies can provide a place to discuss differences. If the differences cannot be resolved, we need to decide if we can continue to be part of one organization.

Schemann wants to stop the debate now by declaring one side right and the other wrong. Willms wants us to be tolerant of each other’s views until a resolution comes about, whenever that might happen. I support Willms’ call for tolerance as well as Schemann’s call for closure. We need to know there will be an end to this debate. Would it be reasonable for our conferences to ask congregations to do their part by the end of 2004?

Once congregations finish their discernment process, they would transmit their understandings and desires to regional clusters and then to provincial conferences for further discernment. If we are diligent in our work and tolerant of our differences we might be able to come to some consensus within four or five years.

—Robert Boardman, Scarborough, Ont.

Arts centres are
inappropriate witness

Congratulations to Bill Block for his letter on performing arts centres (Nov. 4) at Mennonite educational institutions. I also feel it is an important topic.

A recent Canadian Mennonite article talked about Mennonite Educational Institute’s plans for a 1,500-seat arts centre. I shudder to think of the millions of dollars it would cost. Rockway Mennonite Collegiate is also making plans for a performing arts centre.

It appears that increasingly Mennonites mimic broader society in the sense that if we can afford something, we do it. Does spending millions of dollars so privileged Mennonite kids have the finest educational facilities reflect the radical discipleship and humility that Christ’s life taught us?

While our Mennonite brothers and sisters (and others) in Colombia receive death threats for their courageous stance on peace and justice, Mennonites in North America continue to consume resources at an alarming rate simply because we can. U.S. military aid, over one billion dollars annually, is being pumped to the Colombian government to maintain access, in my opinion, to that country’s petroleum resources.

I suggest an alternative to spending millions on arts centres. Let’s use that money for energy and resource conservation. If every Mennonite institution had solar panels and wind turbines producing energy, how many barrels of imported oil could we replace? It would reduce operating costs of these facilities and at the same time point us in a direction that Christians should be leading society.

An arts centre, while pleasing to the eye and ear, is not an example of appropriate Christmas witness to our children or to society, in my opinion. It elevates form at the cost of substance.

—Larry Bender, Tavistock, Ont.