“What to do about River East:” Report about the January 20 Mennonite Brethren Church of Manitoba special session

 

(Note: I was not allowed to attend the January 20 special session as a reporter. The following was written from notes taken by some at the event.) 

The resolution to remove River East from membership in the Mennonite Brethren Church of Manitoba (MBCM)—unless it “returns to an active embrace of MBCM member church expectations by May 30, 2024”—was approved at a special MBCM session on January 20. 

The vote in favour of the resolution was 261 for and 52 against (83.3%). 

The resolution went on to extend an invitation for River East to “return to MBCM if they choose to embrace and live in accordance with our shared member church expectations.” 

The vote was held at the Westwood Community Church in Winnipeg. 

A “healthy and relational” process 

The special session began with a reminder from assistant moderator Terry Dueck that every church that is part of MBCM commits to following the Mennonite Brethren Confession of Faith (COF) and to submit itself to the “wisdom and guidance” of the Conference. 

During a lengthy process and review, he said, it was concluded that River East had broken that commitment to the COF and declined to accept the Conference’s wisdom and guidance—which included an option to voluntarily leave, something the church had “rejected.” 

That decision put the “burden” of deciding what to do about River East on the Conference, he added. 

Dueck acknowledged that, for some in the Conference, the process of dealing with River East had taken too long, while others felt it had not gone on long enough. 

He also acknowledged that, through the process, they didn’t always get it right, but felt it had been a “healthy and relational” discernment. 

He went on to urge delegates not to see River East as an enemy, or to participate in “the enemy-making machine.” 

River East decision “result of 20 years of discussion, study and practice” 

Reynold Redekopp, Chair of the River East Leadership Commission, spoke next. He echoed Dueck’s sentiment, acknowledging “the amazing way that MBCM leadership” had entered into open and honest conversation with River East. 

He then read the River East inclusivity statement, noting that is why “River East is here today.” 

That statement, Redekopp said, “was the result of a lengthy, deliberate process. We were aware that working at the statement, and adopting it, would challenge and change us, and that we were undergoing this work as a discipleship journey, led by God’s spirit, word, and people.” 

The Statement, he said, “is the result of around 20 years of discussion, study, prayer and practice.” 

As a result of that discussion, the church decided it needed to “welcome people with integrity. We can’t welcome people if there are limitations attached.” 

When it comes to how people serve at River East, “we don’t ask about gender identity or ethnicity or income or family status. We look for a love of and commitment to Jesus and an ability that suits the task.” 

This position is “difficult for many to accept,” he acknowledged. But it flows out of “desire to show the love of Christ. We think that love shouldn’t be limited as we are all on the journey of discipleship.” 

He emphasized that River East “did not set out to change the Confession of Faith.” Instead, the church hoped “we could work within these guidelines” through the Borderland Proposal, where the church could remain in MBCM while taking five years to work out the implications and realities of its statement. 

“We have deep ties to the MB Conference that we do not dismiss lightly,” Redekopp said. 

He added that River East appreciates that the Conference “is taking steps to be less hurtful to LGBTQ+ persons, but being ‘less hurtful’ is still hurtful. Strict adherence to the Confession of Faith has failed to protect the marginalized and the vulnerable among us . . . the Confession of Faith as it is currently used is not a document of peace and unity, and, as we are seeing today, it is a document of division.” 

At River East, Redekopp concluded, “we embrace inclusivity as a gift and call of Christ. From the outset, the River East community resolved that our welcome must be an invitation to participate; not merely an invitation to observe. In accepting that invitation people are entitled to the same privileges and responsibilities as any other people on the journey.” 

River East had “open posture” 

Jason Dyck, MBCM Director of Church Ministries followed, recognizing River East’s “open posture” by publicly sharing its story to inclusion and its biblical and theological foundations for inclusion. 

He went on to provide a brief overview of what has happened in other provincial Mennonite Brethren Conferences, with two churches in B.C. leaving or being removed because of LGBTQ+ welcome and inclusion (Artisan and Cedar Park) and two removed from membership in Ontario (Southridge and Free Church). 

Goal and guidelines for the special session 

Moderator Dave Ens then provided guidelines for the session itself, noting it was not open to the public or the media—except for the MB Herald. 

The session also was not made available online, except for members of two northern churches. 

Delegates were given two minutes each to speak, with only two members of each church allowed to speak. If time permitted, more could be permitted to speak. 

Ens reiterated the goal of the special session was not to decide if River East had broken its commitment to the Conference. “That has already been determined,” he said. 

The goal was “what to do about River East” in light of that broken commitment, he said. 

Motion to table and the vote 

What followed was a time for delegates to speak to the motion. Thirty-one people spoke. The majority who spoke supported the resolution about the future of River East’s membership. 

The third person to speak asked for the resolution to be tabled to permit more time for discussion. That motion was ruled out of order. 

The final person to speak was a delegate from North Kildonan Mennonite Brethren Church, who called for the vote to be taken. 

The vote to proceed directly to the vote on the resolution passed by a margin of 267 to 28. The vote on the resolution was taken immediately after that. 

Goodbyes and blessings after the vote 

After the vote was announced, MBCM Provincial Director Cam Priebe noted there were many reasons for the way people voted—for theological reasons, because they trusted the process undertaken by the Conference in dealing with River East, or because they didn’t want to see a break in the unity of the denomination. 

In the future, there will be more need for “listening and understanding” on this topic, he added. 

He expressed his thankfulness to River East leadership for their participation with the Conference in the process. Although the church officially won’t be removed until May 31, he agreed with the church’s leaders that the result of the vote “feels like the end.” 

For that reason, it was appropriate to share goodbyes and blessings, he said, noting the “significant investment” River East had made in the Conference over its 60 years of history. 

He then invited people from River East to share with the delegates. 

River East pastor Mary Anne Isaak began by noting the church had been nurtured by the Conference for six decades, and that it had participated in joint ministry with other churches in Manitoba and across Canada during that time. 

She went on to say the church has now “heard God calling us to move in a new direction,” adding “as we part ways, we acknowledge the many blessings” received during the church’s history. 

River East Leadership Commission Chair Reynold Redekop added he was grateful for the “careful process” undertaken by MCBM. 

The church concluded by saying they prayed MBCM would experience “abundant grace” in the future and that God would strengthen and renew it. 

In response, Jason Dyck said “it should not be easy” to part ways with a member church, and this experience wasn’t easy. 

He went on to say that he didn’t “begrudge” River East not voluntarily leaving, and praised the gathered delegates for “fulfilling your responsibility” through the vote. 

“We may not be able to walk the way we walked for the last 60 years,” Dyck said of the relationship between River East and MBCM, but he prayed the church “would continue to walk the way of Jesus . . . keep on loving one another as brothers and sisters, and grow in the grace and knowledge of Christ.”

Mennonite Brethren Church of Manitoba announces timeline, special resolution to remove River East Church from membership over LGBTQ+

 

Saying it is “the conclusion of the MBCM board, following consultation with the MBCM Provincial Faith and Life Team (PFLT) . . . that River East Church (REC) is failing to uphold the commitment to the Confession of Faith expected of MBCM member churches,” the Mennonite Brethren Church of Manitoba has informed the church it will hold a special meeting on January 20 where delegates will vote on a special resolution to remove REC’s membership in MBCM effective May 31, 2024. 

The full letter about the Special Resolution is below. 

Notice of Special Resolution to River East Church, October 19, 2023 

Greetings to you, River East Church. You are a valued part of our Manitoba community. 

You have been at work to enhance the care and inclusion of LGBTQ+ persons in an intentional manner for many years now, in particular the last four years. We recognize this effort, even when we experience disagreement with aspects of your approach and conclusions. 

It is our wish to convey gratitude to the leadership of REC in so much that you have invited MBCM leadership to observe your work these past years. In particular, thank you to Rennie Redekopp, for his consistent willingness to proactively engage in conversation. 

A personal note from Jason Dyck, “Thank you Rennie, you’ve been a friend.” 

The MBCM Board recognizes that LGBTQ+ persons, along with their friends and families, have experienced exclusion and rejection in churches. While this is not everyone’s story, we know and have experienced that it is the story of many. We are committed to a future where better stories are experienced. Each MBCM church is invited to join in this journey, where LGBTQ+ persons and their families experience inclusion and care. 

We recognize that some of the implications of working to include and care for LGBTQ+ persons can bump up against our shared confession. The MBCM board continues to affirm our shared confession, in all of its aspects. 

We also recognize that we operate from a place of perceived and actual power. Power is often experienced as force, and there are ample examples of church institutions applying power in ways that fail. Our shared confession states that “The church is a covenant community in which members are mutually accountable in matters of faith and life.” 

We recognize that we serve from a position of authority and remain determined to function from a place of humility and kindness as members of that covenant community. 

As you are aware, River East Church was suspended from active membership in Mennonite Brethren Church of Manitoba on May 10, 2023. Per MBCM’s constitutional process, the Provincial Faith and Life Team conducted a review of the circumstances of this suspension. The MBCM board has received that review and has subsequently decided to submit the following special resolution to MBCM churches on or before November 3, 2023. 

Special Resolution Preamble 

The Mennonite Brethren Church of Manitoba recognizes the marginalization that LGBTQ+ persons and families have experienced in churches. We remain committed to our ongoing work to reduce marginalization and the resulting harm, while remaining committed to our Confession of Faith, in all of its aspects. 

As a condition of their participation and membership in the MBCM, every MBCM congregation explicitly commits to an “acceptance of the Confession of Faith of the Canadian Conference” and to not “pass[ing] or accept[ing] resolutions or practices which are in conflict with this [MB] Confession of Faith.” In their sincere effort to offer welcome to LGBTQ+ persons, River East Church (REC) has made statements and decisions (e.g. A Response from River East Church to MBCM Board and PFLT, January 2023) that are substantively in conflict with the Confession of Faith. In so doing, REC has broken their commitment to not pass resolutions or practises which are in conflict with the Confession of Faith. REC has stated their affirmation of the Confession of Faith as well as affirm same sex marriage. MBCM leadership believes this approach to be incompatible with the intent and common understanding of the convictions described in our shared Confession of Faith. 

While our MB Confession of Faith is an expression of what we believe to be truth discerned from Scripture and is therefore changeable by our national MB conference of churches, a local congregation cannot legitimately make changes (actual or interpretive) on its own and then pursue practices in conflict with these nationally shared convictions. 

The conclusion of the MBCM board, following consultation with the MBCM Provincial Faith and Life Team (PFLT), is that REC is failing to uphold the commitment to the Confession of Faith expected of MBCM member churches. 

Special Resolution Explanation 

This special resolution is presented to the Assembly of Congregations at a Special Assembly on January 20, 2024. 

We invite River East Church to join the MBCM and CCMBC community in embracing a posture of commitment to the Confession of Faith. As a part of this return, it is the desire of the MBCM leadership board that River East Church would join us in this important and ongoing work of reducing marginalization and harm. If River East Church cannot respond to this invitation, and actively return to the shared membership expectations of the Mennonite Brethren Church of Manitoba by May 30, 2024, we regretfully acknowledge that River East Church has chosen a path that will end their membership with MBCM as of May 31, 2024. 

Should this ending of membership become a reality as of May 31, 2024, MBCM will continue to extend an ongoing invitation for River East Church to re-apply for MBCM membership if, at that time, they are able to commit themselves to the theological and practical expectations involved in being an MBCM member church. 

With this special resolution, the Assembly of Congregations of MBCM in no way preclude the agency of River East Church. River East Church has the option, at a time of their choosing before May 31, 2024, to withdraw from membership with MBCM. 

Special Resolution 

We, the Assembly of Congregations of the Mennonite Brethren Church of Manitoba, do resolve that, unless River East Church returns to an active embrace of MBCM member church expectations by May 30, 2024, River East Church’s official membership in the Mennonite Brethren Church of Manitoba will end effective May 31, 2024. 

We finally resolve that should River East Church’s MBCM membership end as of May 31, 2024, MBCM extends an ongoing invitation for REC to return to MBCM if they choose to embrace and live in accordance with our shared member church expectations. 

Kind regards, Dave Ens, MBCM Board Moderator, Mennonite Brethren Church of Manitoba

River East Church receives notice of suspension from Mennonite Brethren Church of Manitoba

 

 

River East Church has received a notice of suspension from the Mennonite Brethren Church of Manitoba (MBCM). 

In a letter dated March 1, MBCM moderator Dave Enns indicates the church no longer adheres to the Confession of Faith with regards to marriage. 

The suspension will take effect March 30; River East is welcome to welcome to “provide representation to the (MBCM) board between now and March 20, 2023 to convey any will to avoid this proposed suspension.” 

Following the process outlined in MBCM’s constitution, the Conference will then “conduct a careful examination of the circumstances of the suspension” and then “determine an appropriate recommendation to the Assembly of MBCM.” 

The full letter is below. 

Greetings to you, River East Church (REC). 

You are a valued part of our Manitoba community. You have been at work to enhance the care and inclusion of LGBTQ+ persons in an intentional manner over the past year. We applaud this effort, even when we experience disagreement with aspects of your current statement. 

The Mennonite Brethren Church of Manitoba (MBCM) Board recognizes that LGBTQ+ persons, along with their friends and families, have experienced exclusion and rejection in churches. While this is not everyone’s story, we understand that it is the story of many. We are committed to a future where better stories are experienced. Each MBCM church is invited to join in this journey, where LGBTQ+ persons and their families experience inclusion and care. 

We recognize that some of the implications of working to include and care for LGBTQ+ persons can bump up against our shared confession. The MBCM board continues to affirm our shared confession, in all of its aspects. 

We also recognize that we operate from a place of perceived power. Power is often experienced as force, and there are ample examples of church institutions applying power in ways that fail. Our shared confession states that “The church is a covenant community in which members are mutually accountable in matters of faith and life.” We recognize that we serve from a position of authority and remain determined to function from a place of humility and kindness as members of that covenant community. 

On January 26 2023, River East Church sent a letter to MBCM board and PFLT. In your letter, you’ve communicated a clear disagreement with elements of our shared confession of faith. While you state that you both affirm the confession and will solemnize same-sex marriage, we believe this to be inconsistent with our convictions as described in the confession, both in word and in shared understanding through Mennonite Brethren history. We acknowledge that you also express convictions in agreement with our confession. 

Following the process outlined in MBCM’s constitution, we have concluded the investigation portion. This investigation included, but was not limited to, conversations between MBCM staff, PFLT members and REC leadership, emails sent between these parties, and observation of published material. This investigation was initiated by this MBCM board and we are satisfied with the following conclusions that the investigation revealed. 

The River East Church fails to adhere to the CCMBC confession of faith in the following manner. Our shared confession reads as follows “Marriage is a covenant relationship intended to unite a man and a woman for life.” REC’s approach avoids our confessional definition of marriage as exclusive to a man and woman for life. 

The MBMC Leadership Board, in consultation with the MBCM PFLT, has decided to send this written notice. We are notifying River East Church of the following disciplinary action. 

Unless we are otherwise compelled by River East Church, River East Church will be suspended from membership on March 20, 2023 in accordance with Section 3 Article 2 of the MBCM Constitution. 

We welcome and invite River East Church to provide representation to the board between now and March 20, 2023 to convey any will to avoid this proposed suspension. 

Should these representations be unsuccessful, River East Church’s membership with the Mennonite Brethren Church of Manitoba will be suspended. Following the process outlined in MBCM’s constitution, the MBCM PFLT will then conduct a careful examination of the circumstances of the suspension and report their findings to this board. The board will then determine an appropriate recommendation to the Assembly of MBCM after those constitutional processes are complete. 

Additionally, the MBCM board invites River East Leadership to a conversation over dinner. MBCM leadership will reach out to you to make those arrangements, should you be amenable. May you continue to experience the presence and power of our Lord as you discern the path forward. 

On behalf of the MBCM board, 

Dave Ens, Moderator

Mennonite Brethren Church of Manitoba

River East tells the story of its biblical and theological foundations for inclusion of LGBTQ+ people

 

“Tonight is a night for listening.” 

With those words, Reynold Redekop, Chair of the River East Leadership Commission, welcomed people to the January 14 meeting titled “The Story of our Biblical and Theological Foundations for Inclusion.” 

“It’s not an evening for debate,” he said. “It’s an opportunity to hear a different view. We don’t claim our view is correct or the right point of view—we are all on a journey to follow Jesus and live out our faith. We all have a lot to learn.” 

He was followed by Janet Schmidt, a member of River East who helped organize the event and the November 26 event where the church told the story of its journey to inclusion. 

“This is not a conversation, though we would like to have one,” she said, noting the church had asked the Mennonite Brethren Church of Manitoba (MBCM) for an open discussion.

“We pleaded with MBCM for an open conversation,” she said, adding that not being allowed to talk about it as a whole denomination “is not the Anabaptist way.” 

With that avenue shut down, “we created this event, the only way we could share what we are thinking,” she said. 

The event was not intended as a “comprehensive theological argument,” Schmidt said. “It’s just a snapshot of how we embraced inclusion while being deeply rooted in scripture.” 

Schmidt noted that for many at River East, becoming welcoming and inclusive of LGBTQ+ people meant “changing our minds” about the subject. 

For Mennonite Brethren in Canada, this isn’t the first time members of that denomination have changed their minds, or the Confession of Faith, on topics once considered settled by the Bible, she said. 

This included things like whether or not to accept into membership people not baptized by immersion; moving from the German language to English; embracing and supporting divorced people, including accepting them into membership if they remarried; and women in leadership. 

The people who made those decisions to exclude others “were good men—and they were all men back then,” she said, adding “they also believed they were following scripture. Yet they did significant harm.” 

Now those things are seen as unacceptable today, Schmidt said, noting that the Mennonite Brethren journey on issues like this seems to go from a definite conference-wide decision against something that is supported by scripture and tradition; to a tolerance of churches that hold different ways of practicing the faith; and then to “acceptance without judgement.” 

River East believes the Canadian Mennonite Brethren conference is on one of these journeys with LGBTQ+, she said. 

After Schmidt spoke, River East pastor Mary Anne Isaak shared some of her experiences as a pastor, including times she was part of excluding LGBTQ+ people from the church. 

Back then, she said, “she “felt the Bible was clear, it was sinful.” Today, “still rooted in Jesus Christ and scripture,” she believes otherwise. 

“The last 20 years has been a journey of slow change related to same-sex marriage,” she said. 

Of the church’s journey on this topic, Isaak said she sees River East as “acting with historical integrity with how the Confession of Faith has been adapted in the past.” 

At River East, "we are maintaining a posture of not being afraid to dive into complexity, with a spirit of humility, as we wrestle with biblical texts,” she said, adding “we believe God is calling us to do a new thing.” 

Isaak was followed by Aaron Thiessen, also a pastor at River East, who spoke about his own journey of changing his mind about LGBTQ+ and other topics while taking the Bible seriously, and Gordon Matties, who formerly taught Bible at Canadian Mennonite University, who explored a single set of scriptures on the topic to reveal the cultural and other assumptions behind them at that time. 

The evening was concluded by comments from Schmidt. Looking ahead to the January 20 vote about whether or not to expel River East from MBCM, she noted that most delegates to that meeting “will vote not having heard our story or how we understand scriptures.” 

She said River East had asked MBCM to promote the January 14 event to other Manitoba churches so delegates to the January 20 meeting could learn more about the church's exploration of the Bible, but the request was denied.  

In addition to 124 people at the church in person for the event, there were 181 screens for the livestream on Zoom. 

Note: I made no effort to try to summarize the presentations by Thiessen and Matties. (Wouldn't be able to do them justice!) The event was recorded and will be available at a later date on the church’s website. 

River East has also created a document titled “Talking Points from the Bible for Full Inclusion of LGBTQ+ Persons, and also about the Confession of Faith and Full Inclusion of LGBTQ+.” Find it here.

 

A few observations from the special session to remove River East from membership in the Mennonite Brethren Church of Manitoba

 

(I wasn't at the special session where the vote was taken to remove River East from membership in Mennonite Brethren Church Manitoba. The following is taken from notes about the event.)

In 2023, when the Mennonite Brethren Church of Manitoba voted to remove Jubilee Mennonite from membership, the vote was 74.2% in favour. When River East was voted out, the vote was 83.3%. 

Noting the vote difference, someone asked me: What happened? Why was it higher this time, despite River East’s efforts to share its story and its biblical and theology rationale for inclusivity? 

The short answer is: I don’t know. But I have a few ideas. 

One reason for the change is River East members were not allowed to vote at the special session. That removed as many as 15 votes. But that still wouldn’t have made a huge difference. (79.5%) 

Another reason might have been the presence of large numbers of members from ethnic churches—Chinese, Eritrean, Congolese and others. 

I was told there were more delegates from these churches at the special session than at the March annual assembly where Jubilee was voted out. (But I can’t independently verify that.) 

That would have meant more people at the special session to vote in favour of the resolution. 

One thing that was clear from the comments by delegates from those churches was they were in favour of removing River East. 

Those who spoke talked about the need to “stay true” to the Bible and resist culture, citing Bible verses opposing same-sex relations. 

But they had an impact beyond the meeting itself. 

Prior to the session, MBCM sent delegates a document containing comments from leaders of these churches—comments where they made their opposition to inclusivity very clear. 

A few examples of what they said: 

“To our culture, same-sex marriage is nonsensical, it’s an attack against creation.” 

“We are subject to Jesus and His Word, not culture. God’s word is unchangeable.” 

“This is a time to stand, unite and face societal pressure with the truth. We face an effort to erase Christianity.” 

“We are in total agreement with MBCM leadership. We must obey the Word. We must go back to Biblical clarity, same-sex marriage is wrong. REC has chosen their own path.” 

“There are different conferences. REC wants to change the conference from the inside. REC is coming up with something new.” 

”Let’s not worry about the few that might leave because of our determination to stand on truth and walk the narrow path.” 

“Discipline leaders who compromise the confession. We need discipline to prevent decline.” 

It's possible comments like that helped sway how some voted.

Along with that, there was the threat these churches would leave MBCM if River East was allowed to stay.

Commenting on what he heard while interacting with ethnic church leaders, Jason Dyck, Director of Church Ministries, said: 

“There were certainly themes in common within these conversations. One stood out to me, and when I heard it repeated in my first and second conversations, I tested this to see if it was a commonly felt experience. It was. I did not prime this statement; it was offered in each conversation.” 

He then shared that statement: 

“If MBCM has room for a church who embraces same-sex marriage, in theology and practice, MBCM will not have room for us.” 

If that was true, it could have meant the loss of between 8 to 10 churches—something that would have weighed on the minds of some delegates.

(There were rumours that some other churches planned to leave, as well, if River East was not removed; the number is unknown.) 

Another reason for how the vote came down is it was made clear by MBCM that delegates were not to vote as individuals—but as representatives of their churches. 

As the Conference put it: Delegates to the special session were to be people “appointed by their church leadership who have been chosen to represent the church as a whole.” 

I know at least three churches had meetings to discuss how to vote. I expect others did, too. 

That’s why at the session one Winnipeg church noted their congregation was divided over the resolution. For that reason, they announced they had decided to grant them freedom to vote “their consciences.” 

Also, one or two people who spoke indicated they were sharing as individuals, not as representatives of their churches. 

Another reason for the increase might have been how delegates were prevented from hearing River East’s story. 

On January 14 the church held a meeting to share the story of its biblical and theological foundations for inclusion. 

The church asked MBCM to send an announcement about that event to all of its member churches so delegates to the special session could vote with all the relevant information about River East’s decision in hand. 

I'm told MBCM decided against sharing that information and the link to the event. 

As a result, delegates did not get an opportunity to hear River East's rationale, with the result that some—many?—of them would have gone into the meeting without the full story from the church. 

They would have cast their votes without having access to River East’s rationale for why it made its decision to be inclusive.

Perhaps it might not have made any difference, anyway. But we will never know. 

If you attended the special session, do you have thoughts about the vote? Share about it in the comments.

A conflict resolution perspective on the vote to remove River East from Mennonite Brethren Church Manitoba

 

How did the process leading up to the removal of River East from membership in the Mennonite Brethren Church of Manitoba (MBCM) look from a conflict resolution perspective? That was the question on my mind after the denomination removed River East from membership. 

So I asked Janet Schmidt for her view. Janet has been working in the field of conflict resolution and mediation since 1986. She has a Masters of Education Degree (1987) with a focus on organizational behaviour, and a Certificate in Mediation Skills (1996). She regularly works with churches and organizations to help them address conflict and different points of view, and has facilitated conversations about many difficult and contentious issues. 

She is also a member of River East, and was able to see close-up how the process leading to the church’s removal played out. Now that River East is out of the denomination, she feels free to share her thoughts. 

My questions are in bold. 

How did you feel about the process leading up to the removal of River East? 

I was deeply disappointed in how MBCM managed the process. Yes, River East made a decision outside the Confession of Faith when it came to same-sex inclusion. The problem is the history of the Mennonite Brethren denomination shows that is exactly how the COF ends up getting changed. A church starts acting outside the Confession, conversations happen and then changes are made. 

As Jon Isaak, who directs the Centre for Mennonite Brethren Studies in Winnipeg, noted on this blog, Mennonite Brethren have seen many changes to things once considered to be "standard" in the denomination's 162-year-old history—things such as accepting modes of baptism other than immersion; allowing those who weren't baptized to participate in communion; enabling women to be involved in leadership; and not speaking against cremation. 

When it comes to the Confession of Faith, there have been two changes since 1999. In 2014, the American Mennonite Brethren church decided to change Article 13, the one on love and non-resistance, to say now that “historically” many Mennonite Brethren have chosen to do alternative service in times of war; non-resistance is no longer the default expectation. And in 2021, the Canadian church decided to change Article 8, the one on baptism, softening the covenantal language with the church but keeping all the rest. 

As Isaak put it, “the evidence for changes over time is clear. This should not surprise us. Usually, there are some social or cultural realities that eventually convince the majority of Mennonite Brethren on whatever topic that a change is needed.” 

In other words, is the Confession prescriptive of the way things always have to be or descriptive of how they are at this moment in time when an article was written? For some reason, on this issue the Conference is treating it as the former.

Why does that disappoint you from a conflict resolution point of view? 

It disappointed me because the subject of the Confession—which was at the heart of the conflict—was never allowed on the table. The idea of changing the Confession to reflect the new reality on the ground for the six churches in B.C., Manitoba and Ontario that have been removed from membership was never permitted. That discussion could not be had. All that was said was “the Confession says no” so the discussion was ended. The two study conferences in the past were more teaching events than study events where true exploration was not permitted.  That is no way to deal with a conflict. 

What about the process itself—any thoughts about that? 

My concerns with the process was that efforts to engage in meaningful dialogue were not permitted. We knew the church was out of line with the Confession. But we also said River East did not want to leave the Conference. 

There was never any serious conversation about making space for River East in the Conference. River East asked the MBCM Board to consider the Borderland proposal, where we offered to sit on the edge for five years while a conversation took place. The MBCM board rejected this proposal. 

The first rule of resolving a conflict is there must be dialogue. The Anabaptist way is to talk, to dialogue, to hear each other, to respect differences. We asked for this multiple times and such a conversation was not organized. 

A quick aside: I’m not talking about leaders from River East and from MBCM having a coffee to stay in touch and keep each other informed. That’s good. But it doesn’t replace a full and open conversation among members of the church and the Conference, gathering together, where all can have their say and hear each other. 

But the church did hold two open meetings where it shared it story, right? 

Yes, we did. But we did that on our own because there was no other way for River East to share our story. We built these events based on what other conference members were asking us individual. For our first event, sharing about our journey, we asked MBCM to share the notice with their pastors requesting that they share the information with their community.  This was granted, although we don’t know many pastors shared it with their congregations. 

For our second event, where we shared about the biblical and theological foundations for inclusion, we asked MBCM to again share the invitation with the pastors and the pastors to share it with their church communities. They refused. 

One of my concerns about that, from a conflict resolution perspective, is about gatekeeping. MBCM prevented people from hearing about our convictions. Delegates (we are not sure how many) went into that meeting on January 20 not knowing what we thought or the work we had done to arrive at our conclusions. 

In fact, the only thing MBCM included in the package to delegates was our Talking Points Document, not links to our two events on November 26 and January 14. The Talking Points document was created for our members as a way to help them have conversations with their family and friends, not a coherent rationale about who we are and what we thought. In, addition they included their rebuttal to our talking points document criticizing on gaps that it was never intended to fill.  

It all makes me curious to know how many delegates knew our story, not just what pastors and others had told them or what MBCM leaders had shared with them. We have heard many things about what we did and why we did it that could not be further from the truth. When you don’t allow people to hear directly from people, it becomes a fertile ground of rumours and innuendos.  

I suspect most delegates voted based on what they were told, not on their own informed belief. If delegates still voted to remove River East after attending or watching our two events, and having had a conversation with us, fair game. But not having those opportunities is not OK from a conflict resolution perspective. And it is a travesty of the way Anabaptists are supposed to engage each other. Many churches make decisions this way that are hierarchical in structure; but that is losing our Anabaptist distinctive. 

It all makes me wonder: What was MBCM so afraid of? Why did they have to keep that information from delegates? That’s a question only they can answer. 

What did you think of the resolution itself? 

As written, the resolution did not allow for conversation around the point of difference on the matter of inclusion. In addition, the conference floor is not the place to have dialogue. The most that you get is people exchanging different points of view. That is not dialogue. In addition, River East guests (no longer delegates) and could only speak if permission was granted.  

I am not saying this question didn’t need to come to the larger community at some point. I am simply saying from a conflict resolution lens it needed to happen after there was actual dialogue.  

Any final thoughts? 

I don’t think the vote reflects the feelings of people in the pews. Some delegates were told to come and vote not as individuals, but as representing what their church councils and leaders had decided. At least one church did not select delegates who disagreed with REC being voted out. If that’s the case, people from these congregations should be outraged. 

I’ll admit the way River East engaged in the process wasn’t perfect, either. Our pastors and members had many conversations with people who reached out to us. This took a lot of time in addition to being the church in our community. There just wasn’t enough time to pursue every request. That is why larger group processes are so important.  

What happened was s not the way to do good conflict resolution, and it’s not the Anabaptist way. The Anabaptist way is to talk, wrestle, debate and struggle with issues. To hear each other. I’m very disappointed with how things transpired. 

My final thought is this. MBCM played their hand well, given their goal was to have River East removed (what we call win/lose paradigm). They designed a process, shared information and made a resolution that was bound to have them win. But at what cost? 

Processes that silence voices, that force people to vote with inaccurate or limited information do not bring health to institutions. The unintended consequences of this and other events like this will not bring life and vibrancy to the Mennonite Brethren Conference in the long run. And this just makes me sad, that the conference that I have lived my entire life in would act in this way. 

I would invite every person at the conference who voted for the resolution to at least watch our two taped events “Our Journey Towards Inclusion” and “Our Theological Story of Inclusion” found on the REC’s website at https://rivereastchurch.ca/sermons-category/our-journey-towards-inclusion. I believe REC deserves this act of respect.

River East Church in Winnipeg formally suspended by the Mennonite Brethren Church of Manitoba

River East Church in Winnipeg has been formally suspended by the Mennonite Brethren Church of Manitoba (MBCM). 

The suspension took effect on May 3.

It follows a notice of suspension sent to the church in March and follows a meeting between the MBCM board and River East leadership.

On May 10, MBCM sent a letter to all Mennonite Brethren churches in Manitoba announcing the suspension. The letter is below.

This letter is a follow-up to the March 1 2023 communication you received from us regarding River East Church.

The MBCM Board recognizes that LGBTQ+ persons, along with their friends and families, have experienced exclusion and rejection in churches. While this is not everyone’s story, we understand that it is the story of many. We are committed to a future where better stories are experienced. Each MBCM church is invited to join in this journey, where LGBTQ+ persons and their families experience inclusion and care.

As well, we recognize that some of the implications of working to include and care for LGBTQ+ persons can bump up against our convictions and practices. The MBCM board continues to affirm our shared confession, in all of its aspects.

The MBCM board is moving River East Church’s membership in MBCM to a status of suspended, as of May 3, 2023. This suspension involves a change in River East’s ability to serve and provide representation. 

Members of River East Church will be unable to hold a representative position within MBCM or CCMBC structures and affiliations while this suspension is active. This does not include REC members who are employed by institutions of said structures and affiliations. Additionally, River East Church members will be ineligible to vote on decisions or resolutions considered by the Assembly of MBCM churches.

As per the process outlined in MBCM’s constitution, the MBCM Provincial Faith and Life Team will conduct a review of the circumstances that have led to this suspension. They will report their findings to the MBCM board.

The desire of the MBCM board is to work toward the restoration of REC membership in MBCM. Should this intention find success, the board will then resolve to reinstate River East Church upon the board’s satisfaction that the concerns have been adequately rectified.

Should those efforts prove ineffective, the board will provide recommendation to the Assembly of MBCM churches for removal of membership.

We invite you to be in prayer for all involved as we journey through this process. May God work in and through us as we seek to be faithful in following him.

On behalf of the MBCM board, Dave Ens MBCM Board Moderator