GetReligion reader Duane Shank, a Mennonite who grew up in Lancaster County, Pa., passed along a link to a front-page Philadelphia Inquirer story on the Mennonite tradition of service.
Tied to the massacre of 10 medical aid workers — including Glen Lapp, a Mennonite — in Afghanistan last week, the piece drew praise from Shank. He nominated writers Amy Worden and David O’Reilly as journalists who “get religion”:
This piece is one of the first I’ve seen in a mainstream paper that understands the nuances of Mennonites. Most seem to think that Mennonite and Amish are synonyms.
Here at GR, we like nuance in mainstream news stories. And like Shank, I appreciated the Inquirer story — which does the best job I’ve seen of explaining the faith and motivation of the Christian aid workers slain in northern Afghanistan.
As my fellow GetReligionista Brad A. Greenberg highlighted earlier this week, the Taliban took responsibility for the killings, disparaging the civilian aid workers as “foreign spies” and accusing them of “preaching Christianity.” However, the International Assistance Mission, a nonprofit Christian organization, denies that the workers tried to convert Muslims.
The Inquirer story paints a picture up high of the Mennonite approach to service:
EPHRATA, Pa. — Members of the Mennonite church first came together 90 years ago to ship tractors and plows to fellow Mennonite farmers in Russia and the Ukraine, starving because of war.
Later, in war-torn Vietnam, or when a tsunami ravaged Indonesia or, most recently, when an earthquake wreaked havoc in Haiti, they were there to help the general population.
The Mennonite Central Committee has evolved into a global disaster response relief and community-building enterprise.
Aid worker Glen Lapp of Lancaster, who was slain last week in Afghanistan along with nine others, was one such Mennonite volunteer.
Motivated by faith and a philosophy of service, the Mennonites — cousins to the generally more conservative Amish — have come to be regarded as leaders on the international relief stage.
My only qualm with that opening section: I wish the writers had chosen a different word than conservative. I am not certain, however, that I know what that word should have been. Traditional? Strict? Countercultural?
To the reporters’ credit, excellent background on Mennonites is provided later in the story:
The Mennonite denomination traces its roots to the Swiss-German Protestant Reformation of the early 16th century.
Many Mennonites settled in the Germantown area, joining Quakers, who were similarly persecuted and shared the same antislavery and antiwar beliefs.
Most Mennonites are conventional Protestants who dress in regular clothing and drive, and live in neighborhoods with people outside the faith. But there are several subsets of conservative Mennonites. The most traditional, or “Old Order,” eschew modern clothing and conveniences such as cars and electricity. The so-called “black bumper” Mennonites drive cars, but only own black vehicles and dress in traditional clothing.
The story concludes by tackling the killers’ accusation: Were the aid workers trying to convert Muslims?:
Mennonite Central Committee officials and Schirch strongly dispute the idea that Lapp was trying to convert Muslims to Christianity — which is what the Taliban has said was its reason for killing the aid workers.
“Both Glen and I are Mennonites motivated by our faith, which teaches us to help people in need, turn the other cheek, and love your enemies,” she said.
But converting them was not what MCC or the International Assistance Mission, the group Lapp was traveling with, does, she said.
“The Mennonites have a long history of positive relations with Muslims in many countries” and engage in “respectful exchanges” with people of other faiths. “We help build Muslim schools and try to promote good relations and dialogue… . Glen was a part of that.”
An editor might have moved that section higher in the story. The conversion claim, after all, is a key news question. However, I believe the Inquirer made the right decision by saving that information until the end. By that point, readers have enough background and details — if they didn’t already — to judge the Mennonites’ statements against those of the Taliban.
I read another relatively well-done story in the Cincinnati Enquirer, which covered a church service reflecting on the life and death of victim Cheryl Beckett. It’s a simple thing, really, but the Enquirer recognized the news value of a prayer said by the church’s minister:
“We ask you to forgive those who committed this crime,” (minister Bill) Christman said while invoking God during a prayer. “Help us to have the mind and heart of Jesus, who would have forgiven this.”
In an exclusive report from Kabul, The Associated Press interviewed an official familiar with the account given by the attack’s sole survivor, a Muslim driver for the aid workers:
Safiullah said he doesn’t know why he survived while two other Afghan members of the team were killed. He said he raised his arms in the air and recited verses from the Islamic holy book Quran as he begged the gunmen for his life.
At the end of the story, the AP cites the Taliban’s claims of Christian conversion attempts and the mission group’s denial. It seems strange that the story — so detailed that it mentions the attackers stopping to pray in the evening — does not include the sole survivor’s response to the Taliban’s charge.
The New York Times also attempted to put a face on the victims in a piece headlined Slain Aid Workers Were Bound by Their Sacrifice. Here is how the Times story addresses the conversion question:
Though many of the victims were Christians and worked for Christian organizations, friends and family of the victims denied the Taliban’s charges that they had been spies or proselytizers. “They try to be the hands and the feet of Jesus,” Mr. Beckett said, “not the mouth of Jesus.”
The Times describes Lapp this way:
Glen D. Lapp, 40, of Lancaster, Pa., was a nurse who ran an eye-care program and wrote home of “trying to be a little bit of Christ in this part of the world.”
Finally, there’s this from the brother of one of the Afghan victims:
Mr. Jawed’s brother Abdul Bagin said of the killers: “They were infidels; not human, not Muslims. They killed my brother without any judgment, without any trial, without talking to him.”
Mr. Bagin saw the body in the morgue in Kabul and said there was a single bullet wound, which forensic personnel told him was fired at close range, through the heart.
That’s powerful writing, no doubt.
But again, it seems strange — at least to me — that the conversion question isn’t posed directly: Were these aid workers with whom your brother was associated trying to convert Muslims to Christianity?
 | Posted at 10:30 am |  Print
| Permalink | Trackback |
Comments (12) |
August 13, 2010, at 10:51 am
As to your question, of course they were trying to convert Muslims, though not actively. They were involved in a needed medical or social program. While there, they practiced their version of being Christian, which included prayer, Bible reading, hymn singing and discussions of the spiritual meaning of their work. What they were doing was of obvious interest to locals in need, who would have reason to inquire as to who these people were, where they came from, what there was about their lives or communities that motivated them. They provided a social context for some interaction and interest from the local community. One might deny that this is a mission effort, but I cannot believe that they local churches from which they came would say that they had no intention of converting local people.
Yes, news accounts should have provided more detail. From a former Mennonite.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
August 13, 2010, at 10:54 am
Bobby,
Thanks for this article with all these links. I hadn’t known that one of the aid workers grew up near where I live.
I’m very uncomfortable with the articles that mention - and dismiss - the idea that these aid workers were accused on proselytizing. If they had been trying to convert Muslims to Christianity (which they do not appear to have been doing, just to be clear), would that have somehow justified the killings? It’s very important to get the facts straight, but I wish there had been some kind of statement from a human rights org about freedom of religion. The UN Declaration of Human Rights explicitly mentions freedom of expression and the freedom to change one’s religion. MSM seems to refer to these rarely, if ever.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
August 13, 2010, at 11:30 am
Of course not. But does raising that issue (UN Declaration of Human Rights, etc.) lend credence to the Taliban’s accusation?
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
August 13, 2010, at 12:12 pm
I don’t think so. If a gang of thugs kills someone because of their racial, ethnic, or sexual identity, how much does it matter that the thugs had their facts correct? But I worry that, by not raising the freedom of religion issue, it’s implied that there is something inherently wrong with “proselytization.”
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
August 13, 2010, at 12:18 pm
Good point. Thanks, Mike.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
August 13, 2010, at 12:37 pm
These comments related to human rights, as seen from the perspective of Americans, do not make sense in the context of a Muslim dominated society. an asymetrical cultural clash is involved. No matter how generously welcoming Americans try to be here to Muslims, in order to demonstrate our concerns about our respect for the fine points of individual rights and religious freedom,this has no meaning in Pakistan, unless we have some leverage there. When in Rome, do as the Romans do. Simply put, these people are martyrs in a culture that is not accepting of them. We need to get real about Islam, particularly radical Islam.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
August 13, 2010, at 2:54 pm
The UN statement about religious freedom is not honored in as many places as you might think. Some religions cannot set up shop in some countries. In other countries there are benefits/ penalties to belonging to a particular religion. The US situation is unusual.
For instance, Germany has a list of approved religions and if the group isn’t on it, the group can’t function as a religion in Germany. Example: Scientology. In England nobody in line to the throne can marry or become a Catholic without official permission of the Queen and/or the government; the direct heir to the throne simply cannot. The Emperor of Japan is inextricably linked with the national religion of Shinto. Russia will not return the Catholic churches confiscated by the Soviets; neither will the Church of Ireland return the Catholic churches it confiscated. The Presidency of Lebanon is alternately a Muslim and a Maronite Catholic.
Activities may seem to be permissible or legal, but local sensitivities have to be considered in the real world. That’s what’s at issue with the mosque near Ground Zero. Nothing impermissible or illegal, but incredibly clueless or provocative.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
August 13, 2010, at 3:41 pm
said of the killers: “They were infidels; not human, not Muslims. They killed my brother without any judgment, without any trial, without talking to him.”
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
August 13, 2010, at 3:46 pm
sorry - hit submit rather than blockquote. trying again:
This struck me forcefully. Because what is raging is a battle between those violate Islam in the name of Islam and those who uphold its highest expression. Terrorizing and murdering Muslims in the name of Islam is as bad a perversion as you get. So I’m glad the story included this but I wish they had gone further in exploring this area:
Opposed to what Julia wrote about the Islamic Center near Ground Zero, it’s worth noting that by building it we live American principles as this story notes:
http://www.nytimes.com/2010/08/13/nyregion/13bloomberg.html
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
August 13, 2010, at 6:05 pm
Just a reminder to keep comments focused on journalism issues.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
August 13, 2010, at 7:48 pm
it’s hard to describe the relationship between amish and mennonites in little space. to say the amish are more conservative isn’t quite right but not quite wrong either and i end up using that explanation sometimes. likewise to call mennonites (and other Anabaptists) “conventional Protestants” isn’t quite right either but to be more accurate takes a whole book.
while reading the explanation of mcc’s funding the thought occurred to me, does the term “relief sale” mean anything to people outside of mennonite and amish circles?
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
August 13, 2010, at 11:40 pm
Interesting point about adding UN convention to the stories, but it’s my sense that nobody reading these stories really comes away with the feeling that the medical workers “had it coming” to them.
And I disagree strongly with John Wickey that “of course” they were trying to convert.
First of all, at least one of the foreigners was a “humanist” and of course the Muslims in the party had no such intention.
Secondly, there are Christians who undertake such work not to convert, but purely out of a desire to improve the condition of people.
Third, by saying “of course they were” you are unintentionally contributing to an impression about Christian-affiliated aid workers that puts them at greater risk in places like Afghanistan. There are aid groups like Catholic Relief Services that have zero interest or tolerance for conversion activities — they are there to do aid work, and Catholics give to them out of a sense of wanting to help people in their time of need.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0