Prayers of gratitude and intercession

  • Your national church and local congregation can use the logo to show that you belong. MWC has created a downloadable images to post a badge on your website.

    Read more

    For national church

    For local congregation

  • A teaching resource from the Faith and Life Commission

    What does it mean for member churches of Mennonite World Conference to share an Anabaptist identity? What is the value of Anabaptist “tradition” – and what does that word mean in a global context? What are our Anabaptist understandings of mission and fellowship?

    In 2009, the newly appointed Faith and Life Commission was asked to produce three papers that could be used in helping MWC communities reflect on such questions:

    • “A Holistic Understanding of Fellowship, Worship, Service, and Witness from an Anabaptist Perspective” by Alfred Neufeld Friesen of Paraguay;
    • “The ‘Anabaptist Tradition’ – Reclaiming its Gifts, Heeding its Weaknesses” by Hanspeter Jecker of Switzerland; and
    • “Koinonia – The Gift We Hold Together” by Tom Yoder Neufeld of Canada.

    All three papers were approved as a teaching resource by the MWC General Council in May 2012.


    The word koinonia has rightly become a central term and concept for Mennonite World Conference. In addresses, publications and programmatic efforts, leaders have been nudging the global Anabaptist community to a deeper relationship with each other. Even when we don’t use the word koinonia itself, much of the terminology we use depends on it: meeting needs, mutual encouragement, gift giving and receiving, fellowship, interdependence, solidarity, consensus, communion, community, unity, being “together”…

  • – Introduction Max Wiedmer jusqu’à 2’42’’

    – Jonathan jusqu’à 13’32’’

    – Intervention Matthew Krabill jusqu’à 13’56’’

    – Intervention Siaka Traore jusqu’à la fin 16’10”

  • A Conversation between Mennonite World Conference and the Seventh-day Adventist Church 2011-2012

    In 2011 and 2012, representatives of the General Conference of Seventh-day Adventists and of the Mennonite World Conference met together for official conversations. In many respects the meetings proved to be a journey of mutual discovery.

    Background

    Mennonites and Adventists have had frequent contacts during the past forty years, particularly through their participation in the annual meetings of the secretaries of Christian World Communions. These periodic encounters, along with other contacts, gradually led to the conviction on both sides that an official conversation might be both instructive and valuable.Adventists and Mennonites have distinct identities that are critically important to them. From the outset of discussions leading to the conversation, it was understood that organic union was not the objective. Rather, the dialogue would provide an opportunity for learning about each other’s history, beliefs and values, clarifying misunderstandings, and removing stereotypes. Out of the discussion, therefore, might emerge areas where Mennonites and Adventists can join forces in selected areas of mutual concern.The two communions, viewed superficially, might appear to have little in common.

  • Strengths of Consensus (“becoming of one mind”) Decision-Making

    Consensus, a way of making decisions without voting, can enhance the participation of all members in General Council meetings, provide a collaborative and harmonious context for making decisions, and enable representatives to discern together the will of God (Eph. 5:17) for the church and for MWC.

    • Coming to agreement through honest, respectful discussion is a widely understood and accepted procedure.
    • It encourages consultation, exploration, questioning and prayerful reflection (not adversarial).
    • It values and seeks to utilize the experience and perspective of all members.
    • It seeks to hear, understand and respect all concerns and points of view.
    • It encourages participation by all churches in shaping the decision.
    • It facilitates churches learning from each other and deepening their communion with one another.

    Steps in Coming to Consensus

    These guidelines describe typical steps that are used in making decisions by consensus. Not every step may be appropriate for every meeting or decision but it will be helpful to follow these guidelines as closely as possible. Often one step merges with the next without a clear break in the flow of the meeting. Nonetheless, each step is part of the progression towards reaching consensus.

    1. Information

    1.1  Presenting an issue: Background information on why an issue is being raised, information that will help understand the issue, information that shows the range of possible perspectives and a proposed course of action are provided to GC members and are generally sent prior to the meeting.

    1.2  Clarification of the issue: When an issue is introduced at a meeting, members of the Council are free to seek clarification, to ask questions on the issue and to seek information from differing viewpoints.

    2. Deliberation

    2.1  Open discussion, deliberation: Discussion of the various viewpoints and vigorous debate around different opinions are encouraged. At the conclusion of a speech or a period of discussion, those in general agreement will display orange cards while those in general disagreement display blue cards. If cards are not easily visible to all present, the chairperson advises the Council on the proportion of each being shown. As an indication of opinion that the Council should move on to the next step in the business procedures, members may display their orange and blue cards crossed, so the chairperson can see both together. This indication may be given both during and after speeches. These indications help avoid repetitious speeches, enable the chairperson to gauge the strength of feeling for various ideas, or indicate whether consensus is emerging.

    2.2 Developing proposals: As open discussion proceeds, several specific proposals may emerge or general agreement with the initial proposal may be expressed. Small group work, either formally structured or through brief buzz groups with immediate neighbors, is often a fruitful way of drawing on individual insights to resolve the issue. Small group work enables participation of all members in the deliberations. If the issue is straightforward and the number of ideas for its possible resolution is small, the chairperson or any other member of the Council may summarize a firm proposal for discussion. However, it may be necessary to refer all the ideas to a Facilitation Group to draw together responses and to negotiate a firm proposal for the Council to consider.

    3. Decision

    3.1  Discussion of a specific proposal: In this step, various speakers speak to the benefits and disadvantages of the proposal. It is important to hear from those with enthusiasm for the proposal as well as from those indicating disquiet or disapproval. Members are encouraged to indicate their agreement or disagreement by use of the colored cards. Minor changes of wording may be agreed by the Council from time to time as viewpoints are heard and considered.

    From time to time, the chairperson may check whether the Council is nearing consensus by summing up where it seems the Council is heading and asking: ÒWhat is your response to this proposal?Ó Colored card response will indicate whether more discussion is desired by the Council.

    3.2  Checking for consensus: When the chairperson believes that consensus has been reached (to support or to not support), the Council is asked to affirm this. The chairperson states an understanding of the position reached and asks for an indication of agreement or disagreement (raised cards, voices or show of hands). Typical questions could be:

    • “Do you believe we have consensus in support of this proposal?” or
    • “Do you believe we have consensus to not support this proposal?”

    If there is no strong response to this checking for consensus, discussion may continue to enable doubts and questions to be raised and further viewpoints to be shared. If there is unanimity to support or to not support the proposal, then consensus has been reached and the Council proceeds to the declaration of the consensus result (see paragraph 3.3).

    However, there is a third possibility. After vigorous sharing of ideas, there may be strong but not unanimous support for the proposal. In order to estimate the strength of opinion, the chairperson may ask questions such as:

    • “Who supports the proposal?”
    • “Who does not support the proposal as your first option, but is prepared to accept it?”
    • “Who is not prepared to accept the proposal?” If there is no response to this question, the chairperson may ask the Council:
    • “Is further discussion needed?”
    • “Are you prepared to have the issue declared resolved by consensus?”

    If all agree that consensus has been reached the Council moves to step 3.3.

    If some are still not able to accept the proposal the chairperson invites these people to share their misgivings directly with the whole Council and discussion can continue. Where a small number is unable to agree with the majority after a reasonable time, the Council may move on to the procedures outlined in paragraph 3.4. Skillful chairing is necessary here, to enable the Council to avoid undue delay.

    There may be some who are uneasy about a proposed way forward, yet not able to verbalize their concerns. The prompting of the Spirit may be expressed in disquiet as much as in creative suggestions for wording a proposal. All people are worthy of respect as they indicate their position, and no one should feel pressured into agreeing with a position against their better judgment.

    3.3  Declaration of consensus: On the affirmation of consensus, by whatever means is considered appropriate (cards, voices or show of hands), the chairperson declares the proposal resolved (either approved or disapproved) by consensus.

    3.4  If objections persist: Sharing misgivings about the proposal may clarify concerns or result in minor changes that bring support or acceptance of the proposal. The Council may express its support or disapproval for any minor wording changes, and the process can proceed towards a declaration of consensus. If concerns expressed indicate that further discussion is required the process proceeds as indicated in paragraph 3.1. If objections or disagreements surface that affect the wording of the proposal in a major way it may be possible for an amended proposal to be considered by the Council (see paragraph 2.2), or a Facilitation Group may need to rework the proposal and bring it back to the Council. In this case, the process returns to the steps outlined in paragraph 2.2.

    At this late stage in the process it is possible that a major consideration may be aired which was missed by everyone. Where the chairperson considers this to be the case, the process returns to the clarification of issues stage (paragraph 1.2), allowing development of the new point and appropriate discussion of the attendant issues.

    3.5  Agreement – not unanimity: If (after careful attempts to work towards consensus) there is a small number who are unable to support or accept the majority position, the chairperson may ask:

    • “Do those unable to support the proposal and not prepared to accept it, believe your point of view has been listened to, even though you don’t agree with the proposal and are not able to accept it?”
    • “Do those who support or who are prepared to accept this proposal believe you have heard what the others of our Council are saying?”

    If there is assurance that dissenting views have been both expressed and understood, the chairperson may ask for an indication of viewpoints on these two questions:

    • “Are those who are in the minority on this proposal prepared to live with the majority view and allow the Council to record an agreement?”
    • “Does the Council therefore wish to record agreement on this proposal?”?Ó

    If no person indicates against these two questions, then agreement is recorded. If one or more indicates against either of the two questions, then the Council proceeds to the next step (paragraph 3.6).

    3.6  Need for a decision now: If consensus on the issue is not reached the Council discusses by consensus procedures the need for a decision at this meeting. If there is no consensus after a reasonable length of time that a decision must be made at this meeting the chairperson implements the formal voting procedure (paragraph 3.7). If the Council does not agree that a decision is required at this meeting, there is opportunity for further work and the process may continue in accordance with the options in paragraph 3.8.

    3.7  Decision by formal majority: If there is consensus that a decision is necessary now, or the chairperson implements the formal voting procedure, the Council moves immediately to final discussion of the proposal and decides the matter by formal majority vote.

    3.8  Further possibilities: In any decision session where the Council has not reached consensus or agreement on a proposal, or where it has resolved that a final decision on a proposal is not needed at this meeting, options that may be considered include: a) referring the issue to the Executive Committee for determination; b) referring the issue back to the original party or to another special group for further consideration and later re-submission to the Council; or c) deciding that the matter be no longer considered.

    In one of these ways, the issue is dealt with and is not left pending. Even a decision that the matter be no longer considered must indicate the reason for its lapsing, perhaps leaving the door open for further research and presentation, or closing the door firmly and stating the reasons for so doing.

    In cases where consensus is difficult it is incumbent on those with concerns to work closely with those who initiate the issue to find creative ways of moving forward, not just exert veto power by refusing to cooperate.

     

    Based on “A Manuel for Meetings”, The United Church in Australia Assembly, 2001, Callingwood, Australia, pp. 25-30.


    MWC Reference Notebook 6.0 Guidelines / 6.2 Making Decisions by Consensus Guidelines

  • During the past two years, MWC asked member conferences for accounts of experiences in peacemaking. MWC’s Peace Council considered these stories during two days of meeting in Bulawayo, Zimbabwe, in August 2003. The following summary was developed out of that discussion.

    1. Continuum of peacemaking activities:

    All Christians are called to be peacemakers, but this can happen on a variety of levels. The Peace Council discussion identified the following levels, acknowledging that this is not an exhaustive list:

    a. Peace with God: individual con-version creates a new person who can live at peace. This is the base for all the other levels of peacemaking.

    b. Peace within one’s self: self-esteem and integrity are important components of peacemaking.

    c. Peace within the family: churches work with family life and relationships and with issues of domestic violence.

    d. Peacemaking within congregations and conferences: churches have dealt with internal conflicts.

    e. Peacemaking with neighbours: churches have worked at solving conflicts with others and among groups in their communities.

    f. Peacemaking with other Christians: conversation and witness reaches across historical divisions.

    g. Peacemaking with members of other faiths: churches struggle with questions of how to relate with respect and witness with integrity.

    h. Peacemaking within nations and between nations: churches have worked for peace on national and international levels.

    i. Peacemaking with the environment: churches strive to live in ways that care for the earth.

    j. Peacemaking with enemies: at all levels of relationship, this is a spiritual challenge.

    2. Biblical virtues that undergird peacemaking:

    The peacemaking activities of churches grow out of their reading of the Bible. A number of biblical virtues serve as a basis for peacemaking:  

    • liberty
    • self-esteem
    • love
    • repentance
    • corporate-ness
    • suffering (including patience, forbearance, and endurance)
    • reconciliation (which includes restoration)
    • justice and peace held together
    • confrontation of injustice
    • joy
    • courage
    • humility
    • forgiveness
    • witnessing

    3. Practices that form Christians as peacemakers:

    Peace Council participants noted these practices that instill peacemaking as a habitual practice for Christians:

    a. Catechizing and discipling: the Christians’ identity as peacemakers is imparted in the way churches teach and receive new members.

    b. Worship: peacemaking identity and habits are instilled in the way congregations worship God.

    c. Prayer: peacemaking habits are engendered by prayer and the spiritual disciplines. Witness to the powers can also be considered as prayer.

    d. Christian education: this shapes peacemakers; Christian education should include specific training for all ages, including church leadership, in peacemaking skills.

    e. Voluntary service: these activities can help young Christians learn peacemaking as they do it.

    f. Global awareness: this expands understanding of those beyond our boundaries; global awareness should include awareness of inter-ethnic and inter-faith differences.

    g. Non-violent action: advocacy to those in power and actions that confront injustice help Christians develop peacemaking skills.

    4. Recommendations to MWC:

    The Peace Council participants encouraged MWC to continue making peace a central part of conversation between member churches. To help this happen, the council made these recommendations:

    a. MWC should encourage all member churches to find ways to cooperate with other Christian churches and groups in their contexts in peacemaking efforts, with special attention to activities of churches in the United Nations’ Decade to Overcome Violence.

    b. MWC should designate one Sunday each year as a global peace Sunday, encouraging member churches to hold special worship services around, similar to what is now done for the World Fellowship Sunday. Suggested worship materials should be provided for this day.

    c. The next MWC world assembly should have one day or one worship service with a theme of peace. This could include sharing stories from around the world of ways in which churches are working for peace.

    Courier, Volume 19, volume 3, 2004

  • Scripture offers three models for relating faithfully to Muslim neighbors as a reflection of the Trinitarian God. Participants will consider their own relationships to Muslims as we reflect on examples of hosts (Kenya and North America), guests (Somalia), and mutual partners (Tanzania and the Allies for Peace project).

    Presenter: Peter Sensenig serves with MMN and EMM in France and francophone Africa; member of EMM’s Christian-Muslim Relations Team; EMM East Africa regional interfaith consultant from 2015-2020; ordained MCUSA 2008; PhD Theology/Christian ethics Fuller Theological Seminary; taught courses in two Somaliland universities; author Peace Clan: Mennonite Peacemaking in Somalia (Pickwick, 2016).

    Indonesia 2022: Workshop

  • The Global Anabaptist Peace Network (GAPN) is a network that seeks to connect and support peace organizations (agencies, schools, training programs, research projects, think-tanks, activist-focused initiatives, activists, scholars) that have emerged from and serve our global Anabaptist-Mennonite church communion. Our hope is to provide a supportive community as we work together at making our world a better and more just place. We want to help one another in embodying and witnessing to justice, peace, and reconciliation. 

    In our pursuit of these goals, the GAPN seeks to: 

    • Connect the “fruit” of our Mennonite World Conference related churches and walk in solidarity with, and support, one another.
    • Strengthen the church and communities of peace and justice in our world and for the world.
    • Create opportunities to explore what it means to be dedicated to Jesus’ way of peace. 
    • Nourish our Anabaptist-Mennonite Christian identity and our peace consciousness.

    In seeking the above goals, the GAPN provides the following in our ongoing communal effort in being agents of peace and justice: 

    1. Sharing news and resources: we share and provide information, prayer requests, and resources (such as training and educational material) among member organizations.
    2. Connect: we want to connect and learn from one another. In order to foster this connection, we help to provide and map organizational presence and activity and share that with member organizations. 
    3. Create spaces: we create spaces whereby member organizations can connect, learn, and be transformed through gatherings and opportunities to come together. The GAPN supports and facilitates spaces for members to meet, share, learn from one another, and connect, both incarnationally (i.e., in face-to-face gatherings) as well as virtually. 

    We welcome your involvement in the GAPN! Please fill out this form and return it as indicated.

  • A Statement of the MWC Mission Commission

    God is a missionary God. Jesus is a missionary Lord. The Holy Spirit is a missionary empowerer. The entire Bible is a missional book. The whole church is a missional people.

    Therefore, by the grace of God, as an Anabaptist faith community

    1. ORIGINS

    We lead people to know God as Father, the Creator who initiated in Christ a loving, comprehensive plan to restore peace to the universe.

    2. MEANS and MODEL

    We announce Jesus, the Son of God, as both the means and the incarnate model by which God restores peace. It is through Jesus’ life, teachings, death, and resurrection that the door opens to reconciliation, redemption, new creation, and eternal life. Incarnational witness and service is our model for mission.

    3. POWER

    We walk in the power of the Holy Spirit in word, deed, and being. We live and proclaim the kingdom of God, forgiving, teaching, healing, casting out evil spirits, and embodying suffering love.

    4. MESSAGE

    We invite all people to acknowledge Jesus as Lord, turn from sin, receive baptism upon confession of faith, and follow him in life as part of the worshiping, serving community of faith. This community is itself a sign to the world. We announce God’s kingdom by serving others with humility and gratitude, caring for creation, and seeking to live in the world without conforming to the powers of evil.

    5. SCOPE and TASK

    We go beyond our communities as witnesses, following Jesus’ instructions to make disciples of all peoples. We form new communities of believers, transcending boundaries of nationality, culture, class, gender, and language. Because we believe that God has created and blessed cultural variety, we expect new forms of the church to emerge as we go.

    6. RISK and SUFFERING

    We trust God in all areas of life, living as peacemakers who renounce violence, love our enemies, seek justice, and focus especially on serving and reaching out to the weak, poor, vulnerable, voiceless, and oppressed. Because Jesus Christ suffered for us, we also accept risk and suffering for his sake.

    7. TEXT

    We hold and share the Bible as our authority for faith, life, and mission. The Holy Spirit within and among us is the primary interpreter of the Word.

    8. WORSHIP

    We gather regularly to worship, celebrate the Lord’s Supper, and hear and respond to the Word of God in mutual accountability. Our worship is an integral part of equipping us to participate in God’s mission.

    9. UNITY and RESPECT

    We promote the unity of all Christians as part of our witness, and we respect the people of other faith traditions as we share the hope that is within us.

    10. FULFILLMENT

    We eagerly await Christ’s return and anticipate the final fulfillment of God’s kingdom when people of every tribe, tongue, and nation gather in worship around the throne of God and of the Lamb.

    21 March 2014, in session at Dopersduin, Schoorl, Holland

    Book: God’s People in Mission: An Anabaptist Perspective

  • God’s Shalom Project, by Bernhard Ott