Readers Write: September 2024

Questions about MCC ethos

I appreciate Canadian Mennonite’s reporting on the open letter from terminated Mennonite Central Committee (MCC) workers (“Involuntary,” July 2024). Well done.

When I first read the open letter, I was distraught, but I shouldn’t have been; the appeal for accountability should be heard by leadership in all of our organizations. I’ve witnessed abrupt terminations in other Mennonite institutions and churches, carried out as if this was acceptable practice.

I have heard too many stories about traumatic dismissals, often without explanation or recourse. For the one so ignominiously dismissed, the wound is deep.

I speak from nine years of experience as country representative with MCC in Indonesia and Cambodia, and four years as the senior advisor for peacebuilding with World Vision Indonesia. I have also worked on a number of personnel policies, harmonizing them with national labour standards. I don’t recall hearing about cases quite like those in the open letter.

In post-war Cambodia, MCC bent over backwards to support MCC workers in stressed situations. Area directors were caring and had a high regard for good process. Still, PTSD was always just around the corner.

It pains me particularly to learn about MCC workers in highly stressed conflict situations seemingly not being heard nor supported, and then dismissed while under duress.

I am offended that Anicka Fast and John Clarke were offered substantial sums of MCC constituency funds in exchange for signing a non-disclosure and non-disparagement agreement. They did not sign, choosing instead the path of holding MCC accountable.

While being interviewed for a position with MCC Canada, I was asked: “Would you be willing to fire someone?” The question disquieted me enough that I was relieved when I did not get the job.

Is MCC’s ecclesial ethos being eroded by increasing dependence on a corporate personnel management culture in which expediency trumps respect for each volunteer and staff?

There is no place for heavy-handed, non-restorative HR practices. Otherwise, I’m concerned that distrust will creep in, and workers may begin looking over their shoulders. I dearly hope that the MCC organizational culture is not drifting away from the ecclesial identity upon which MCC was founded.

Thankfully, a majority of MCC workers have good experiences, but close attention needs to be paid to the hurting minority.

In my 25-plus years working with non-profits, I’ve come to the conclusion that an organization is only as healthy as its HR culture.

I wish MCC grace, wisdom and courage. I still have MCC in my heart.

– Allen Harder, Abbotsford, B.C. (Emmanuel Mennonite Church) 

Conflict v. abuse

In response to “MCC executive directors respond to concerns of former workers” (August 2024), yes, there is a difference between abuse and conflict. Conflict is a human constant; every organization has conflict. Abuse can happen in the context of conflict, particularly when the conflict is poorly understood and power imbalances are ignored.

The authors of the open letter named their experiences as abuse, based on established understandings of that term.

At this point, there are literally dozens of people alleging some experience of abusive treatment during their time working for Mennonite Central Committee (MCC). They use the term “abuse” because it is the most accurate term for the things they report having experienced and had reported to them. As of this writing, those reports encompass many forms of abuse, including sexual abuse.

I think these execs are trying to make readers (and donors) suspect that the writers of the open letter are overreacting, overstating the case and/or providing information that is not to be fully trusted.

All abuse allegations are complicated. It’s part of the nature of abuse that it’s hard to describe succinctly. This kind of both-side-ism in the face of abuse allegations is a way of vaguely casting doubt on people who do not have institutional power. But you don’t have to fully understand everything going on to recognize a pattern when it’s staring you in the face.

We’ve all seen what happens when leaders refuse to entertain the possibility that they have systemic problems with abuse, and I think that’s what happening here, despite all the posturing. It doesn’t end well for anyone. MCC deserves better.

– Stephanie Krehbiel, executive director, Into Account

Public explanation please

As a former Mennonite Central Committee (MCC) worker, I am greatly concerned about the charges made against MCC concerning terminations (“MCC executive directors respond to concerns of former workers,” August 2024). Of course, MCC will have its own version of events, but the charges are serious and deserve a public explanation.

Most alarming are the non-disclosure agreements (NDAs). It seems that MCC has adopted some of the worst policies of secular business. It appears the approach is less about mediation or reconciliation than: “Take the money and keep quiet.”

How does this possibly fit with Christian ethics, let alone Mennonite principles? I suspect the NDA issue alone will cost MCC millions in lost donations.

– David Nichol, Sudbury, Ontario

Saddened

I have rarely read an article that disappointed or saddened me as much as “MCC executive directors respond to concerns of former workers” (August 2024). Seven individuals who committed years of their lives to the work of Mennonite Central Committee (MCC) wrote an open letter talking about their suffering, pain and trauma (“Involuntary,” July 2024). They were courageous enough to be vulnerable and cite specific examples from their experiences. And the article of response does not even acknowledge their pain or express sorrow and compassion for their ongoing suffering.

I see MCC as an arm of the church. If we as church cannot show compassion for those we hurt, we are guilty of trying to take the specks out of others’ eyes while ignoring the log in our own.

To the authors of the open letter, I am sorry that we as the larger church have not been there when you needed support, compassion and understanding.

– Pam Driedger (Online comment)

Calgary Inter-Mennonite update

The article “From ‘the centre of the military universe’ to central Alberta” (May 2024) resonated with us. It was interesting to read about Debbie Bledsoe’s journey, which culminated in her finding an affirming congregation in Edmonton.

This story reminded us of the step in the journey that our church, Calgary Inter-Mennonite, took in 1997 when we not only became affirming but also formally joined the Supportive Congregations Network, a program of Brethren Mennonite Council for LGBT Interests.

However, our decision was problematic for the three conferences to which we belonged: Northwest Mennonite Conference Alberta, Conference of Mennonite Brethren Churches and Mennonite Church Alberta. Over the course of a painful nine-year process, all three revoked our membership.

At the time, one of our members said that in 20 years this would not be an issue in many Canadian Mennonite congregations. It is encouraging to note that this is beginning to happen, with the knowledge that change takes time.

It appears that, in recent years, some Mennonite churches have become affirming without negative consequences to their relationships with their conferences. Edmonton First Mennonite Church’s affirmation of Debbie and her wife, Emily, demonstrates a greater inclusivity for those who identify as LGBTQ in Alberta Mennonite congregations.

We are updating Canadian Mennonite readers that our congregation continues to grow around spiritual and social justice concerns, including affirmation of, and solidarity with, LGBTQ persons. Their presence and participation as members in our faith community have been enriching and enlightening.

– Brenda Dyck, Evelyn Neumann, Linda Shantz- Keresztes (Calgary Inter-Mennonite Church) 

Growth can solve poverty

I read Zach Rempel’s article, “A recipe to reverse the economy” (August 2024), with great interest. I, too, believe that doing more with less is important. For my wife and I, living simply meant raising our family on one income, owning only one car and living in a relatively small house.

(I did, however, get tired of hearing from my environmentalist friends, with their two cars, two incomes and large homes, how my views on carbon emissions were wrong.)

I live in the business world, and in that world doing more with less is an everyday goal. Keeping input costs low is pursued daily. In most industries, labour is the highest input cost, so we must get as much production as possible to keep prices competitive.

Before you condemn the business world for trying to make labour as productive as possible by increasing energy consumption, I ask you this: Do you have an electric coffee grinder? Grinding your coffee manually would save electricity, which in much of the world is produced with fossil fuel. To save labour you use cheap energy.

However, cheap energy is not available in many countries. According to the UN, 2.7 billion people cook with wood, charcoal, animal dung or other biofuels, and smoke from indoor cooking fires contributes to an estimated 3 million deaths annually. Meanwhile, 22 percent of the global population lacks basic sanitation.

Do I support degrowth? No. I want massive economic growth so we can solve some of these issues. We know how to do it. Increasing food production, providing cleaner and cheaper energy to those who cook on open fires, and providing sanitation will require huge economic growth in much of the world.

Once these goals have been reached, we will be able to make real progress on the environment. We can do it not by making everyone poorer, but by making the whole world much richer. This is the good story we need to tell our children.

– Jim Peters, Winnipeg

Imagine degrowth

I appreciated Zach Rempel’s piece on degrowth ( “A recipe to reverse the economy,” August 2024).

I stumbled on the topic early this summer, and rediscovered hope for our future in Less is More, by economic anthropologist Jason Hickel.

At first glance, degrowth sounds scary, especially if we think it will be akin to the unplanned economic contractions we have experienced. But, with forethought and political will, our governments could thoughtfully examine which industries we want to grow because they promote the

well-being of human beings and the ecosphere, and which ones should be scaled down because they are environmentally costly and do not contribute to human flourishing.

Imagine an alternative world. After governments divested from industries that foul our environment and create wasteful products that people don’t need, workers from those sectors could be redeployed to the sectors we want to expand, particularly public services such as education, health, housing and transportation. Care for elders and other family members, traditionally undertaken by women, could become valued, paid work.

Once we disincentivized housing as an investment commodity, and invested in more public housing, marginalized population could be housed. 

The normal work week could be reduced to 28 hours. With more leisure time, we could have more time to cook, play with children, visit friends.

Our minds have been colonized by economic growth dogma that says, I consume, therefore I am. Let the Holy Spirit blow through us and sweep out the cobwebs of old thinking so a new path forward can emerge. Let’s be part of the movement to make more-with-less living visible and appealing to our society. Let’s talk in our congregations about how we can reduce our consumption individually and collectively. And let’s press our leaders to give up the fable that GDP is a proxy for human happiness.

– Julie Armes, Kitchener, Ontario  (Stirling Avenue Mennonite Church)