Apostasy of the 1960s-Chester Weaver-Anabaptist Perspectives

[Ms. Izzie]

Please watch if you're interested, tell us your thoughts, and maybe it will spark a conversation about something other than covid-19.

[francis]

I recognized the chart he used! I think learning Mennonite history is valuable although using the term "apostasy" is a bit inflammatory (implying that the liberal Mennonites renounced Christ which I believe they did not.) I realize he has his own perspective, he lived through this and I did not.

[appleman2006]

I watched this last night and I must say after watching his other presentation on fundamentalism, this one had me a bit confused. I am guessing that I am a few years younger than him but not that much, so I also grew up when a bunch of this stuff was happening. However while I have no doubt that if we sat down together we would discover that we have very similar concerns and dreams for the future, I sense that our understanding of how to get there might be quite different.
IMO he gives a little too much credit to those that left the conference in saying that they had all the right motives. I think history has shown that in fact some of their methods have proven to be very disastrous and I thought that is some of what he was referring to in his previous talk on fundamentalism but now I am not sure.
I almost get the impression that he feels if we maintain the culture that the rest will kind of fall into place and take care of itself. Whereas I believe that maintaining a culture is the easy part and in no way parallels with a corresponding following of Jesus. Maintaining a culture can be accomplished through a strict authoritarian discipline. Passing on a love for Jesus and a desire to follow in his footsteps requires a change of heart in each person through successive generations that surpasses cultures and may in fact mean that one generation will look somewhat different than the following generation.
I would love to sit down with Chester and hash this out through the lenses of our different experiences. My thinking is that in the end we may not be too far apart but my fear is that there are many in the target audience of which that was for that will be turned off from that because they have experienced some of the results of the conservative movement three generations later and found it wanting in some pretty big ways.

[Neto]

I don't know how old Chester Weaver is, and growing up in the Mennonite Brethren church, we were quite well insulated from all of this, actually nearly everything that was going on with the Mennonites in the eastern US. Historically, the MBs had been severely rejected by the General Conference Mennonites, and my first real contact with them was during my Freshman year in Bible Institute, where my roommate and nearly everyone I went to classes with were either non-Mennonite, or GC, or some sort of 'Eastern Mennonites'. But at the same time, my experience with what I saw there doesn't mesh with what he is describing here. Maybe my interaction with these other students was in a different time period than that to which he refers. I was there at that school only one year, the 74-75 school year. But here's the difference - I had absorbed 'Americanism' in the public school where I attended. Tears would come to my eyes when the American flag passed by in a procession. In my HS years in MBY (MB youth) I had joined some non-Mennonite background youth in encouraging our youth directors to sing patriotic songs in our church youth meetings. But in that environment during my Freshman year of college, I began to grapple with the demands of the Kingdom of God - against the American 'kingdom'. The GC kids that I had the most contact with professed a different type of stance that what C. Weaver describes here - they were activists pacifists, I would say now largely influenced by the Hippie Peace Movement. As I also moved into that, we believed that the preceding generations had really walked away, and that we were returning to true anabaptism. But this was not a 'revival' but rather a revitalization movement. (I attempted to explain this in another thread, and it did not garner any interest, so I won't belabor it here again.)

But what I wanted to say here is that even as wrong as that position was, that is what brought me close enough to non-resistance to have the tools to even think about it. So I owe that to the Christian Hippies. I don't know what would have happened to my 'development' had I stayed at that school, but because I ended up at a completely non-Mennonite school for the rest of my college years, I worked it out myself from the Scriptures, and yes, totally within the Jesus People environment. That right there works against the 'group-think' that I hear praised so much in some of the circles in which I find myself now. C. Weaver himself stresses that each generation must come to personal conviction (at least that's how I understood him). In my experience, that simply does not take place when there are a lot of externals that are stressed, seemingly over personal convictions. A 'generation' is made up of individuals, and don't think there is such a thing as group salvation. (Not to say that there is no such thing as a 'people movement' where a group makes the same personal decision at the same time, and in cooperation with one another.)

[DrWojo]

While it’s been 20+ years since I had Bro. Chester Weaver for a Bible School teacher, I would say if you want some background on his background you can either read the book Keeping the Trust published by Eastern Mennonite Publications or his own recently printed The Things Which Become SOUND DOCTRINE on the life of Aaron Shank by Sermon on the Mount Publishing. Either book points out how in the 1950’s tobacco growing and using was fairly common, even among ordained members. I don’t know if y’all would consider that an act of apostasy, or perhaps you’d rather interpret the fact that it’s not an issue anymore as some kind of upward Evolution ? Revisionist History ? A couple of other ‘practices’ also documented in both books would be the acceptance of divorced and remarried persons into the church membership as well as allowing women with cut hair to participate in communion. Would these actions constitute apostasy on the part of the Mennonite Conference Churches? Bro. Chester Weaver’s own book on Aaron Shank further points out how the Eastern [Pennsylvania] Mennonite Church swung radically and (in my opinion) fanatically Ultraconservative to the point of rudely and very disrespectfully wanting to throw Bro Aaron our of the very Church he peacefully brought out of the Lancaster Conference. These happenings I was an eye witness to and make me wonder if Bro Chester somehow is defining ‘Fundamentalism’ as the underlying stimulus that fueled the drive to Ultraconservatism? If such is the case then I would probably agree with him; however, if he thinks an emphasis on Doctrine=Fundamentalism and militates against his blessed Glassenheit then I disagree although he would probably accuse me of not practicing Glassenheit!

[ohio jones]

Transparencies! Now that is a throwback to the 1960s for sure.

The content is consistent with what I've heard Chester speak on previously. I'm sure it serves his purposes to highlight only the good that has come from aggresso-conservatism, but it would be better on the whole if he could be straightforward about the shortfalls of taking a separatist path. While he is right that many problems have surfaced in mainstream groups over the last 50 years, a different set of problems has become apparent in the conservative movement. Surely each generation can learn from both the wisdom and the mistakes of their predecessors.

[DrWojo]

An unknown but wise individual once said,

If you erase all the mistakes of your past, you would also erase all of the wisdom of your present. Remember the lesson; not the disappointment.”

[Neto]

I am not familiar with the situations and doctrinal issues which brought about this split, except from the little I have read here. But it reminds me of our ("Russian" Mennonite) own experience with the divisions that took place in the 1800's. Discontent over the sad state of morality in the "Large Church" was the impetus for the birth of the Mennonite Brethren church, the "division" into which I was born, and in which I grew up. Some ministers who stayed with the main church were sympathetic to the desire for renewal in spiritual life, but in the end turned against the MB movement. That may be a strong indication that the MB group was over-reacting, or, it may just mean that those ministers were not willing to face the opposition that would surely come upon them and their families if they took a stand with the new group. (Many MB business owners faced total financial ruin because of the measures taken by the Big Church to kill the new movement, and families were broken apart.)
I'm reminded of the saying about a frog in a pot of water on the stove. But I'm also reminded of the controversy of public vs private church schools. I did all 12 years in the public school, and sure, it was a different time, and it was also in the "Bible Belt", but that just meant that it was kids from other churches who beat up on me, instead of total "non-Christians". Being in that environment shaped me. I realized I needed to live the Christian life, and I tried to be a witness. I'm not sure how much good it did for the 'other side' overall, but I know that I was able to 'reach' some of my classmates to some degree, enough that one of the 'wild girls' told me that she hopes to "someday believe like you do". I have not seen her since graduation, but we're "FaceBook Friends", and she posts comments consistent with Protestant Evangelical beliefs. (Salvation, Pro-Life, etc. - unfortunately, also patriotism.)
Getting back to the MBs, I have heard that some are now seeking some sort of reconciliation with the rest of the Russian Mennonite church, but I fear that the main part of the other groups have already gone so far down the wrong path that it would only corrupt the MB church. But what would have come about if they had stayed, and continued to work from the inside? It's impossible to know, because you cannot go back & do it over, and then compare. I think the same is true among your "Eastern" Mennonite divisions. I was thinking during the night about what I would like to have in a congregation, and a larger association is a big part of that. I realize that 'conferences' start from splits, and every new group has "baggage" they take along with them from the controversies that birthed their movement. Every existing group here in the East is just a bit "foreign" to me, because I do not have that shared background.

[barnhart]

...The content is consistent with what I've heard Chester speak on previously. I'm sure it serves his purposes to highlight only the good that has come from aggresso-conservatism, but it would be better on the whole if he could be straightforward about the shortfalls of taking a separatist path. While he is right that many problems have surfaced in mainstream groups over the last 50 years, a different set of problems has become apparent in the conservative movement. Surely each generation can learn from both the wisdom and the mistakes of their predecessors.

This is helpful context for those of us who don't know him and have never heard him speak. And I like your term "aggresso-conservatism," it encapsulates some of the energy found in those movements. I think its safe to say neither side of this split became who they wanted to be after the divorced. Once un-tethered, the breakaway momentum is not easily arrested and may accelerate.

[Judas Maccabeus]

...The content is consistent with what I've heard Chester speak on previously. I'm sure it serves his purposes to highlight only the good that has come from aggresso-conservatism, but it would be better on the whole if he could be straightforward about the shortfalls of taking a separatist path. While he is right that many problems have surfaced in mainstream groups over the last 50 years, a different set of problems has become apparent in the conservative movement. Surely each generation can learn from both the wisdom and the mistakes of their predecessors.

This is helpful context for those of us who don't know him and have never heard him speak. And I like your term "aggresso-conservatism," it encapsulates some of the energy found in those movements. I think its safe to say neither side of this split became who they wanted to be after the divorced. Once un-tethered, the breakaway momentum is not easily arrested and may accelerate.

This acceleration is now being seen in the MCUSA as we speak.

Os Guiness wrote a book, about 30 years ago, it was "The Dust of Death" and it detailed the changes he believed were caused in the church by the cultural changes of the 60s. I was around for that, and to say the least, it was quite profound.

Many of the issues that our society is dealing with now have their roots in the 60's. It was as profound of a time of social change as the 20s.


J.M.