With McLaren’s message in mind see today’s (4/2/07) New York Times article, “Old Church Becomes Mosque In Altered and Uneasy Britain”.  It reports on the controversy surrounding the recent acquisition of a former Methodist church in the small village of Clitheroe, England by a seemingly moderate Muslim congregation.   The Methodist congregation had long ago withered and the building had become a factory in the 1960’s; Yet, the acquisition of the building by Muslims was a wrenching experience for this community.    What does this say about what the church has taught about the nature of God, about who’s in and who’s out—that “Christians” would rather see their (former) sacred places become factories than places of worship??

- Doug C.

I welcome McClaren’s discussion in Chapter 18 about exclusion and inclusion. I appreciate especially his distinction between purposeful inclusion and naive inclusion.

As a pastor, one of my primary commitments was the ministry of lay persons – in the congregation, yes, but even more, in their families, places of work and volunteering, and service in the community. So the intent and focus of many of my sermons affirmed my vision and offered my support for lay persons in ministry.

My preaching was a valid “first step” but it did not by itself change the culture of the congregation. Further, my preaching did not show in any visible way that I was willing to share the power I had as pastor with lay persons who also had spiritual gifts, personal vision and important  responsibilities. To fulfill their ministry, they needed not just my permission and support but also some of my power.

I thought of my experience after hearing on March 18th Keith’s bold call to our congregation to be “inclusive.” He sees inclusion is rooted in the Gospel and is confirmed by his personal experience. With all my heart I celebrate his sermon. It is welcome and appropriate and absolutely necessary. Without his authority and witness, we will not have the vision to deepen our commitment and the courage to widen our fellowship.

Sermons alone are not sufficient. When a preacher names all the people he wants us to include, he is seen and heard as a healthy white heterosexual male with power and privilege and wealth in the society as a whole and in the congregation in particular. For all his commitment and compassion and empathy, he still is not a persons with disabilities (now); a person of color; someone who is poor (now); gay or lesbian person.

“I want us to welcome them” is what is heard. Those who listen to welcome his words are still “OTHER.” That is the STRUCTURE of the speaker/listener relationship even if that is not the spirit and intention of the preacher.

So, how do we take the next steps to allow the people “we” want to include to become more visible in the ways that they can experience themselves as part of us and not as “other?”

- Myron T.

* * * * *