In defence of Immanuel Pentecostal Church's stance on smudging

The Mennonite Central Committee recently planned a fundraiser that would have taken place at Immanuel Pentecostal Church, a large congregation with a beautiful facility.

The Church regularly makes their facility available for rental use – presumably to serve the wider community and to generate extra income.

Their arrangement with MCC would have gone off without a hitch were it not for a traditional smudging ceremony taking place as part of the event’s program. The leadership of Immanuel Pentecostal objected, and MCC was forced to cancel the event. But more importantly, a public discussion has begun.

As could be expected, public opinion of Immanuel Pentecostal’s decision does not appear to be in the church’s favour. Charges of intolerance, and of overbearing suppression of other beliefs, are circulating on social media.

Immanuel Pentecostal’s refusal to allow the smudging ceremony has conjured difficult memories of Residential School style exclusion of Aboriginal beliefs.

I don’t presume to speak for Immanuel Pentecostal, but I’d like to offer a mild defence of their decision or at least help people understand where they may be coming from.

In defense of Immanuel Pentecostal

We live in a culture, and a city, where many different people live together while practising their different belief systems. As a Protestant minister I would not propose an administration of our sacraments in a Catholic church, even though there may be much friendliness between our communities. I would cover my head if invited into a Sikh Temple. I would remove my shoes in a neighborhood Mosque.

Christian congregations often prohibit alcohol consumption on their church premises even when the facilities are rented to outside groups. If one were to rent such a hall, for a wedding let’s say, those beliefs ought to be respected. Many faith groups would have compunctions against taking part in the ceremonies of others.

This is understandable and does not necessarily indicate lack of respect. We should all be seeking to understand one another better. But we also should not compel each other to go against our consciences in order to accommodate another belief.

Immanuel Pentecostal apparently does not feel comfortable with another spiritual practice taking place in their facility. Their facility, while sometimes made available for other uses, is their sacred space. It is set aside for their worship and practices.

Although I do not know very much about indigenous spiritual beliefs, as the situation with MCC and Immanuel Pentecostal intensifies, I find myself wondering if the concept of sacred space exists in Aboriginal belief systems. If I were the pastor of Immanuel Pentecostal, it would be my job to ask, listen, and learn to see if there is.

In their beliefs, are there certain spaces set aside specifically for spiritual purposes? Are there certain activities to be avoided or guarded against within them?

There may be. If there are, then there is ready-made common ground for understanding of why Immanuel Pentecostal may object to smudging under their roof or on their parking lot.

Some will point to other Christian groups who don’t appear to have difficulty integrating indigenous practices. But that does not mean all do. That does not mean that all should.

Spiritual ≠ religious?

In discussions about the cancelled fundraiser, some have said that smudging is not religious but spiritual. While some Christian groups can easily make that distinction, Immanuel Pentecostal does not. And here lies the point! We all believe differently about such things! And it is because we believe differently that we should respect each other’s consciences regarding what we can or cannot participate in.

It must be noted that there is a particularly troubled past regarding traditional aboriginal practices. There is a different tenor here than with other inter-religious relationships – between Sikhs and Christians for example.

Our shared history is filled with governments and religious groups repressing and disallowing traditional indigenous practices. There was a definite power imbalance in regards to inter-religious and inter-cultural relations. This unjust and painful legacy no doubt plays a part in many reactions to this story. This is understandable.

We need a great deal of education, reconciliation, and goodwill in order to heal these hurts that are completely inexcusable. There is a lot of room for more discussion between different members of our city on a great array of issues, not least the reprehensible legacy of European treatment of First Nations people.

But it is precisely because of the fact that no religious or spiritual practice should be coerced that we should not vilify Immanuel Pentecostal. The church’s leadership is apparently not comfortable having a non-Christian spiritual practice in their space.

It should not be asked of them to violate their conscience. As a Christian pastor, I am not sure what choice I would have made in their shoes while under public scrutiny. I do not envy them this difficulty.

Niigaan Sinclair

Apparently Niigaan Sinclair, a University of Manitoba Native Studies professor, would like to meet with the leaders of Immanuel Pentecostal. This is a superb idea! Getting to know and discussing beliefs held in common and what is disagreed upon is a wonderful bridge-building activity.

But friendly dialogue is a far cry from pressure to let a certain ceremony take place in a church building. I hope that such a meeting could take place and both sides could share and learn from one another.

Perhaps Immanuel Pentecostal will change their minds. Perhaps they won’t. But if we are to truly respect one another, we ought not force the violation of one another’s consciences.

Steve Swan is a pastor of The King’s Fellowship in downtown Winnipeg. He is the father of two and a life-long Winnipegger.