Definitions

[Josh]

In this thread I would like us to clarify and come to a consensus on what the different denominations are. If we need to have intense debate, we should make a separate thread to hammer that out. That way, it will be clear the right people are answering the questions, instead of people speaking on behalf of other groups.

I will go with Stephen Scott and Cory Anderson's definitions for Anabaptist groupings.

Questions for Anabaptists: Theologically Conservative or Evangelical:

- This is for you if you consider yourself an Anabaptist and do not think same-sex marriage or ordination of openly LGBT people should happen.
- This is for you if whether or not you are okay with women being ordained.
- This is for you if you don't think all the women in the church should be required to wear head coverings during worship, even if you're okay with some women choosing to do so of their own accord.
- This is for you regardless of if you hold to pacifism or if you believe it might be okay for a Christian to be a police officer, etc.

Questions for Catholics and Orthodox:

- This is for you if you consider yourself part of the Roman Catholic Church, Eastern Orthodoxy, Oriental Orthodoxy, or Church of the East, or closely aligned splinter groups such as Russian Old Believers.

Questions for Anabaptists: Plain or Old Order

- This is for you if you consider yourself an Anabaptist and you think when church happens, women should wear head coverings during worship and prayer, and if you also believe that men and women should refrain from using violence to the point of killing someone, even in otherwise justified self-defence, going to war, working as a police officer, and so forth.
- This is for you otherwise regardless of if you consider yourself "conservative", "plain", and so forth, as long as you feel you can agree with the above sentence.

Questions for Anabaptists: Mainline/Mainstream or Progressive:

- This is for you if you consider yourself an Anabaptist, and also believe it is allowable or even a biblical mandate to allow women to be ordained, and you wouldn't leave a church simply because a woman was ordained.
- This is for you regardless of if you hold to pacifism or if you believe it might be okay for a Christian to be a police officer, etc.
- This is for you if you don't think all the women in the church should be required to wear head coverings during worship, even if you're okay with some women choosing to do so of their own accord.
- This is for you regardless of if you think LGBT ordination is okay or not okay.
(Some people may 'overlap' between this grouping and the Anabaptist-Theologically Conservices or Evangelical grouping above.)

Questions for Protestants: Mainline and Evangelical

- This is for you across the wide spectrum of Protestant beliefs, both "mainline" Protestants (like Presbyterian Church (U.S.A.), The Episcopal Church, the Church of England, and so on), various other Protestant groups (Old Catholics, Seventh-Day Adventists, and so on), plus the many different evangelical groups (like Presbyterian Church of America, the Free Church of England, Pentecostals, and so on).
- Nearly anyone who considers themself Christian but doesn't consider themself Anabaptist, Catholic, or Orthodox is going to belong to this category.

[Ernie]

Questions for Protestants: Mainline and Evangelical
- Nearly anyone who considers themself Christian but doesn't consider themself Anabaptist, Catholic, or Orthodox is going to belong to this category.

One exception to this is some who continue in the Stone/Campbell movement, who do not consider themselves Catholic, Orthodox, Protestant, or Anabaptist.

[Josh]

Questions for Protestants: Mainline and Evangelical
- Nearly anyone who considers themself Christian but doesn't consider themself Anabaptist, Catholic, or Orthodox is going to belong to this category.

One exception to this is some who continue in the Stone/Campbell movement, who do not consider themselves Catholic, Orthodox, Protestant, or Anabaptist.

That’s true. The rest of the world considers them Protestant, though, and any reasonable definition would include them. It would be laborious to include every “true church” group which claims not to be Protestant.

[Neto]

In this thread I would like us to clarify and come to a consensus on what the different denominations are. If we need to have intense debate, we should make a separate thread to hammer that out. That way, it will be clear the right people are answering the questions, instead of people speaking on behalf of other groups.

I will go with Stephen Scott and Cory Anderson's definitions for Anabaptist groupings.

Questions for Anabaptists: Plain or Old Order

- This is for you if you consider yourself an Anabaptist and you think when church happens, women should wear head coverings during worship and prayer, and if you also believe that men and women should refrain from using violence to the point of killing someone, even in otherwise justified self-defence, going to war, working as a police officer, and so forth.
- This is for you otherwise regardless of if you consider yourself "conservative", "plain", and so forth, as long as you feel you can agree with the above sentence.

First, I'll just say that I do not consider myself to be "Plain" (although I once Adapted to a basically 'Plain' church lifestyle, neither my heritage nor my current way of life reflects this), and I have never had any ties to anything that could be characterized as "Old Order". (I do ascribe to a "simple" lifestyle, but that is probably something different.)

That said, I add these comments regarding the definition given here:

re: the veiling (and the uncovered head)
I hold to this belief, that the instructions in the Scripture on this are to be obeyed. What if 'we' are wrong?, someone may ask. Then at least we have erred on the side of seeking to obey.

re: violence and self-defense
I would take it a bit farther, because some forms of physical resistance, even though not engaged in with death as the objective, may culminate or result in the death of the other person. For example, a simple shove can result in death through the person loosing their balance and striking their head on some hard or sharp object, or being impaled on some sharp object. (Do I realize that, in a moment of fear or danger, I might unthinkingly respond to some threatening situation in this way? Yes, I do. But I would consider it a sin just the same, and I pray that I never will do that. Actually, a tendency to sometimes respond to aggressive driving in the same manner is my greatest spiritual weakness in the area of non-resistance.)

[Josh]

What term would you like to apply to yourself, Neto?

[Neto]

What term would you like to apply to yourself, Neto?

I really do not know. My comment was not a complaint. I just didn't know that I fit anyone's description for that 'category'. (That is why I have refrained from commenting in the "Questions for ___" threads - I didn't know where I fit, if at all.) However, there is very little in Menno Simons' writing with which I would disagree, even with the basic premise of his booklet on the incarnation of Jesus Christ - that Jesus was pre-existent, and descended as the WORD, and became a human child in Mary. (That is, he did not "take on flesh" as Calvin says - He BECAME flesh, as Scripture states.)

I have in the past said that I hold to the historical doctrines of the Mennonite Brethren church, but there are also some exceptions. I am not insistent on immersion (or on any particular mode). I'm not sure about the very early years, but by the time I was aware of salvation doctrines, the MB congregation where I grew up were pretty well in the "eternal security" camp. (I do actually hold to a belief in the "eternal security of the believer", but I define it in a sense which the average proponent says is "playing with words". I say "The believer is secure in salvation as long as he or she continues to believe, continues to BE a believer." I have also seen that the opposite of 'belief' in the Scripture is not described as "unbelief", but as disobedience. So to me, it is a given that a believer is one who seeks to obey, not living in disobedience. I do strongly suspect that this was also the early MB doctrinal position, but I'm not aware that it was stated in this manner.

[As concerns 'modern' MBs, there have been lots of changes, even just in the last 30 years. So I would have more exceptions if I were referring to the current state of the MB conference. (There probably are, however, individual congregations that hold to the "old doctrines", and I know for certain that there are individual members who do. I know quite a few personally, some being family members.)]