Politcally Neutral

I am 75% sure I did some sort of musing on this topic several months ago, but the topic came up again in my life and I feel the need to muse again, so hopefully it will not be all re-runs, if it is, then that is just my small way of supporting the Screenwriters Guild. One of the churches I serve is looking at its building use policy and trying to decide how best to word it. One of the phrases that came up was that we would only let politically neutral groups use the building. The concern of church is members is wanting a clear policy that let's us say no to highly partisan groups, in particular political parties. But I find the implications of the statement interesting. I do not believe The United Methodist Church is a politically neutral group. While it does not support any major political party, it does take some highly political stands. This is also the way I think it should be. The church should be advocating for people, whether it is people's rights, the needs of different groups, and so on. The statement "Christ is king" was meant to be political, so we should be living into that heritage. So while the church itself should be political, how much can it align itself with other political groups? Should we open our doors to every political group? Or only ones that we agree with? Is simply providing people a place to meet a sign that we implicately agree with what they are saying?
So what sort of answers do I have to all the questions I am posing? I think that some of these are hard issues to deal with. I really believe that the church needs to be ready to be a home for political groups. It was because of the backbone network of churches that the Civil Rights movement of the 50's and 60's succeed. Even then King faced pressure from many in the church to take a more neutral standpoint. It is easy for us now to look back at the Civil Rights movement and talk about how churches were doing the right thing to be involved. But are there issues going on today that need the direct support of the church? I have two thoughts on this issue. One is that I believe the church needs to not be afraid of alienating people because of what it stands for, if it feels it does so because of what Scriptures and God are calling it do. At the same time I think the church needs to be constantly open to creating room for conversation. The church should not just be about seeking to live out Christ's message in the political realm, but should also be creating a space for dialogue. I really love the statement "Open hearts, open minds, open doors." I believe that part of that commitments means that the church should be open to people we do not agree with, and part of the being the church is providing a safe place for conversations to happen that cannot easily happen in so many other places in our highly fragmented society.
As I continue to reflect on all this I am left thinking in several different directions, so I imagine this all makes a lot less sense to my readers than it does to me as a writer, but I would hope that it stirs you to think even half as much as it as caused me to think, cause that is why I post these after all. Have a great Thanksgiving!