21st Century Mennonite: Ecclesiology Wednesdays with Justin
In the past few posts from this series on ecclesiology, I’ve wondered a lot about the boundaries of the church – how broad should boundaries be drawn, is some boundary inevitable, what would it take to transcend these boundaries? In general, I like the idea of being as inclusive as possible; it seems to be part of the church’s calling to invite in those who remain outside of community for whatever reason.
Probably the most radical way of opening up these boundaries would be to ask whether creation as a whole could be seen as a part of the church. 
Could we be in community with all things – trees, pets, soil, water systems? There is something attractive about this idea. It would acknowledge the fact that we are all dependent on non-human life forms and the environment that sustains us. It would help us to see human needs and values as only a piece of a larger network of value. It would also embody a deep theological commitment to God as the creator and lover of all creation.
gives plenty of examples of church leaders who told abused women that they should “bear the cross” like Jesus, sacrificing themselves for the sake of their abusers.
. Recently, we’ve started using an Anabaptist-themed liturgy, which also helps to give structure to the service. Sometime during worship, another person is in charge of leading a time of input. This is normally a discussion of an article, or someone sharing a story. It’s usually interactive rather than a monologue. We don’t have a full-time staff person, but our moderator handles details like scheduling volunteers. The service usually lasts an hour and a half. After worship, we share a potluck meal. This is fairly informal and allows us to connect with each other on a personal level. And the food is always great!
, seminal Mennonite theologian, John Howard Yoder, addresses the diverse and evolving nature of Christian communities. Yoder notes that congregations must see moral discernment as an ongoing process. He writes, “Just as a wisely written constitution for an institution or government provides procedures for amendment and for decision making rather than immutable prescriptions, so the Christian community is equipped not with a code but with decision-making potential.” He goes on to emphasize that communities must take their social location and overall situation into account when developing ecclesiological standards. Yoder writes, “Any full system of goals and procedures which could be adequate to guide the obedience of Christians in one specific situation, would by that very fact have to be out of date or out of place in other situations.”
. 
, ecclesiology raises questions about the nature of the church and the ways that it is distinctive and different from its surrounding society. The type of ecclesiology embodied by this film suggests that the guiding principles of the Christian church are commitments to love and justice, which must necessarily manifest themselves differently in each unique church location and should be lived out and interpreted in consort with the voices and experiences of all members of each given community.
, it is important to understand God as a being concerned primarily with love, in all of its many manifestations. As McFague writes, “If, however, God is the love that creates, sustains and transforms everything that is – if God is the declaration that reality is good – then all is changed. It is not, then, so important that ‘I believe in God’ as it is that I align my life with and toward this reality.” Although McFague is speaking as an individual, this statement can be extrapolated to include churches (the lived reality of ecclesiology) as well. Therefore, I see myself and the church as agents of that love, enmeshed and intertwined with the world and the communities around us and engaging all parts of creation with love. 
, process theologian Marjorie Hewitt Suchocki describes a process ecclesiology. Suchocki echoes this belief that the work of the church should be focused on the pursuits of deeper senses of love, and she expands this definition to include justice (an expansion that I appreciate). Suchocki describes the church’s fundamental purpose as such: “The church is called, by its identity in Christ, to be love and justice, to be openness and mutuality, and in the living dynamism of these qualities, continually to move into deeper forms that manifest these qualities.” This is both a fluid ecclesiology, and an ecclesiology that is inherently particular and meets the needs of the individual. For example, because of Lars’ particular historical experiences, and his need to work out human intimacy in a safe space (visibly represented by Bianca), his community needed to extend their love not just to Lars, but they needed to find ways to affirm his experience and Bianca’s existence, as well. Bianca was real for Lars, and the community took this very particular, and perhaps odd, reality seriously.
