Anthropological Insight 3

I began this short series with a modest proposal, to wit: “Make a friend who sees life differently than you do. Build the friendship slowly. Test the waters gradually. Explore their view of life, seeking to understand why they think that a particular stance towards LGBTQI+ is important, or what they think we should do as we respond to homeless people on our streets, or any other subject important to you. Don’t try to ‘convert’ them. Try to understand them.”

In this episode, I will apply this proposal to a recent event in the life of the larger church to which I presently belong, the Mennonite World Conference. Every six years, MWC meets in a grand assembly hosted by one of the member churches of the conference. The next scheduled assembly was set for 2028 in Ethiopia. Last month, the Meserete Kristos Church (the host church) withdrew their invitation because of their understanding that Mennonite Church USA and Mennonite Church Canada have embraced the LGBTQI+ lifestyle and agenda.

This perception is, I think, mistaken, but I will not address it further. My purpose is not to give the truth of what MC USA and MC Canada have actually said or done, but rather to explore the assumptions driving the responses of both sides in this particular case.

First, an impression. My impression is that members of the Meserete Kristos Church see North American progressives as profoundly unfaithful to biblical Christian faith. Further, I suspect that North American Mennonites see Ethiopian conservatives (I am using the labels as a kind of shorthand) as bigoted and reactionary – or as unduly influenced by American evangelicals. I believe that neither characterization is true or helpful.

Consider North American progressives. My experience of North American Mennonites (of whom I am one) is that they generally are wrestling with difficult social and biblical questions and have arrived at differing positions (conservative and progressive) out of a desire to be both biblically faithful and socially relevant. Although I am more conservative myself, I recognize in my brothers and sisters a deep desire to follow Jesus faithfully within a society that marginalizes many people. Progressives see that marginalization occurring especially within the LGBTQI+ community. I think myself that their analysis is perhaps too simplistic, but they have engaged far more within that community than I have. I do not question their good faith. As I listen to their voices, I hear a deep desire for justice and for respect for God’s image in all people. I embrace that desire whatever I think of their conclusions.

Consider African conservatives. The impression that they are simply parroting American conservatives is almost insulting. The colonial process is a reality of their and our history, but even at the height of the colonial era, colonized peoples were active agents in forming their own faith and culture. At this point in time, dismissing their views on the basis of Western influence can be a kind of reverse imperialism: We think we know what they should think and say and seek to impose our views on them.

Why then do they see sexual purity as so important? One commentor I read (on Facebook) after the Meserete Kristos disinvited MWC suggested that the Ethiopians were stuck in a kind of purity culture. The comment is (it seems to me) a mixture of accurate perception and false sophistication. Conservative cultures in general do think in terms of purity, but that way of thinking does not make them less sophisticated or modern. Jonathan Haidt (whom I have referenced before) suggests several foundational themes for morality. Progressives prioritize care for others and equity; conservatives add several other themes, including purity and sanctity. (You can read more about the work of Haidt and others in this area in the article on Moral Foundations Theory in Wikipedia.)

In short, then, conservatives value purity (as well as honour) in a way that progressives don’t. Progressives value care for the individual and equity (i.e., equal rights) more than conservatives do. Conservatives may well value fairness and equity, but they also consider other factors (such as purity).

Apply this to the decision by the church in Ethiopia. North American demands for equity for a marginalized community run into deeply held cultural beliefs about purity and honour and sanctity. Conversation about these clashing positions is hard, especially when we are speaking across ethnic boundaries and when we (in North America) have a history of imposing our beliefs on others. But such conversation remains necessary, and “curious listening” is an indispensable part of continuing in relationship with each other.

I grieve for the disinvitation, because it means we are stepping away from such conversations. The loss of this particular forum, however, can also be a step towards taking each other completely seriously and reengaging with our brothers and sisters across ethnic and cultural and political divides. We need each other, and we need to learn from each other. Which requires “curious listening”.

I repeat my modest proposal: Find someone who stands in a different place from yourself and listen to them, really listen to them -- not to convert them or to prove you're right, but to understand and grow yourself. 

31 December 2025