Mosaic Mennonite Conference’s vote to leave Mennonite Church USA (page 18) is a fitting culmination to the year commemorating 500 years of Anabaptism. While this decision is tragic, it is not surprising that descendants of the 16th-century radicals carry on what is at the bitter heart of our identity: the urge to separate from those deemed not holy or faithful enough.

Nancy R. Heisey, Philadelphia

The U.S. Mennonite world changes as MC USA no longer is so much bigger than other U.S. Mennonite conferences/denominations. Will that make a difference in how these Mennonite bodies relate to each other? In these times of national polarization and chaos, will they find new ways to work together as siblings in Christ?

Richard Thomas, Facebook comment

If Anabaptists spent as much energy and worship over the scriptures and the factors that call us to unity and love rather than conjuring up ways to separate us and deny God’s love and acceptance of all, we would be a more blessed people.

Ken Martin, Facebook comment

It’s probably time for Mosaic congregations that value a connection to MC USA
to find another conference home and leave behind the ambiguity that persists in ­Mosaic about embracing queer folks.

Forrest Moyer, Facebook comment

Anabaptists are grassroots to the extreme. It is the working out of the priesthood of all believers. Theology is from the pew up, so hopefully from the scriptures up. When resolutions from the denomination go against the view from the pew, there is no way people will stay. Theology becomes democratic, for better or for worse.

John Gingerich, Facebook comment

According to Mosaic leadership, the measure to leave MC USA passed by the required two-thirds vote. Not so fast! Vot­ing is not a biblical model for discerning spiritual issues. Two models recorded in scripture are the lot (Acts 1:26) and conferring (Acts 15). We no longer use the lot, and conferring takes too much time and effort. Mosaic used green, yellow and red options: Green was yes; red was no; yellow was yes; abstaining was no. Ergo, the result was 74% yes and 26% no. Really? Go into any voting booth, and the options are “yes” and “no.” There is no “yellow,” and to abstain is not to vote at all. Only “yes” votes are counted as “yes” votes. The Mosaic vote showed a divided church body: 64% voting yes and 36% not voting yes. At best, it was a split vote, with many expressing reluctance to move ahead. At worst, it was a clever use of numbers to achieve a desired outcome. No one knows what 10% were thinking by voting yellow or 3% by ­abstaining. Conclusion: Flawed voting, flawed reporting and flawed church relations.

Gerald Benner, Souderton, Pa.

Editor Paul Schrag replies: Mosaic leaders made clear to delegates that yellow meant “I yield to the recommendation” and would count as “yes” and that abstentions would count as “no.”