Judiciary
Homepage
WRITTEN STATEMENT BY RAY GINGERICH
I have been asked to testify to this body as a representative of the Mennonite Church (specifically those Mennonite bodies represented by the Mennonite Central Committee).[1] But as with most other religious groups, it is not easy for Mennonites to address issues of controversy with one voice. I have therefore attempted to shape my testimony around critical points of Mennonite heritage and identity held in common by the Mennonite peoples.
The heritage of the Mennonites that emerged out of the sixteenth-century Reformation is that of a persecuted minority people-tortured on the wrack, drowned in the rivers, burned at the stake, driven out of the land-oppression legitimized in the name of God and the Christian church, legalized by the civilized states of Western Europe. Our Mennonite foreparents came to this continent for land, for liberty, and for space to practice love toward the neighbor. Mennonites today continue to be one of the many religious minorities of this beloved country, the United States of America. It is therefore understandable that Mennonites cannot now maintain integrity by aligning themselves with the majority religious position of those controlling the legal instruments of the state when the design of the majority position will quite clearly weaken the voice of the minorities. Thus, in finding ourselves in opposition to the proposed "Religious Equality' Constitutional Amendment, we defend our current interests. But we do so speaking out of our deep social, political, and theological roots.
To pass an amendment would lower the safeguards of religion from intrusion by the state and would allow greater freedom (and added economic support) under the protective umbrella of the state for those holding to the majority religion. This added freedom to practice religion in public schools and other public places- whether on a national or local level-would de facto be freedom for the majority while de facto denying this freedom to most minority religious groups not in power. This, as seen from the perspective of the Mennonite heritage, is not a move toward democracy but toward majority rule and majority religion, not a nudge toward greater freedom and a deeper national spirituality but a shift toward the potential for religious tyranny.
Secondly, in the tradition of toleration and the search for the dignity of the socially marginated, we wish also to assist in the protection of religious freedom for other minorities. Mennonites are a people of the Book in the great stream of the Judeo-Christian tradition whose master teaches us to do unto others as we would have them do to us. We do not want other minorities, whatever their beliefs and religious understandings may be, to be subjected to denunciations of their religious beliefs in public schools or other public places or to face proselytizing through prayers or other religious activities in our public institutions. Such activities would most likely be sponsored and implemented by those of the majority religion operating our public schools and by government officials. But once the current constitutional protections from religion-by-the-state would be removed, public schools could become targeted arenas for small but zealous political-religious groups to promulgate ideas and behavior destructive to public interest and order.
Third, Mennonites are a people of community-a people who hold their daily acts and lifestyle to be expressions of their faith as significant as their words and the creedal statements. We hold the home and church to be the institutions of primary responsibility to inculcate and model religious values, practices and behavior, not the public schools.
Praying is a symbolic act in which the people and the symbols surrounding us in prayer -are as important as the words of the prayer itself. Mennonites would prefer to have their progeny associate the Lord's Prayer with a community of faith gathered before the cross symbolizing the servanthood of Jesus and the self-giving love of God. To associate the Christian faith with the nation's flag in a public school (or elsewhere)-as the proponents of the proposed "Religious Equality Amendment" are prone to do-is, within the theological tradition of the Mennonites, seen as an idolatrous form of civil religion. Such religion, when practiced on a regular basis in our public schools, inextricably confuses the Christian faith with American nationalism in the developing child's psyche (and even in that of the practicing adult).
Fourth, Mennonites are one of several denominations in the United States who together are known as the "historic peace churches." We claim a tradition in which the values and the underlying assumptions of the community of faith are distinct from those of the nation-state-at times even in opposition. We believe that in "living out' our faith there are times when the Christian commitment to a nonviolent Christ conflicts with the claims of sovereignty made by a nation- state that has largely rejected the path of nonviolence. We believe that violence destroys justice and perpetuates greater violence.
We fear that our beloved nation is rapidly becoming a demonstration to the world of a society created by violence, driven by violence,destroyed by violence-the violence of economic greed, the politics of deceit and misinformation. All of this is happening while mainstream religion in America- the religion of those groups most ardently lobbying for prayer in schools and for placing restrictions on the First Amendment-provides no critique of the fiandamental malady of the nation-institutional, religiously sanctioned violence.
Under these circumstances, we cannot and dare not in the
name of God, or evangelical faith, or "family values," or a
renewing of national spirituality, pursue the goals of our
faith by sanctioning prayer in public schools (or in other
ways enabling the state to become more involved in religion)
and thus allowing this to become yet another layer of
religious deception sanctioning American violence.
[1] The current statement is an individual member's attempt
to be representative of the Mennonite Church. It should not
be viewed as a statement by the church. Mennonites are a
congregationally-oriented people-church. Statements of belief
and policy must not merely represent a broad spectrum of the
congregations, but must be officially adopted by the
congregations'delegates before they should be recognized as
statements by the Mennonite Church.
Judiciary
Homepage