MennoNet.com

Ernie, I'm not ready to say it's good or bad but I am pointing out it's not "staying the same" from a philosophical viewpoint and that shift likely has repercussions that should be considered as well.

joshuabgood wrote: ↑Fri Apr 26, 2024 8:29 am I don't care for the idea of legislating uniforms if it means those that don't wear the uniform are not given the kiss of fellowship or permitted to be in community, that is communion, with the saints.

I am certainly in agreement with this. But I think that where this happens, there is some bad theology-ecclesiology, not anything particularly wrong with having uniforms and discipline, per say.

barnhart wrote: ↑Fri Apr 26, 2024 8:32 am Ernie, I'm not ready to say it's good or bad but I am pointing out it's not "staying the same" from a philosophical viewpoint and that shift likely has repercussions that should be considered as well.

Yes, I will be quick to say that there are some really negative repercussions.

However, in a world of very rapid change, I think there are good reasons for holding on to a culture, as long as it is not imposed on others who did not grow up with that culture. John D. Martin makes a case for this calling it "cultural capital". What John does not address is how we should best relate to/support Christians who did not grow up with the same cultural practices or folks with little cultural capital.

I wouldn't argue against that. I still wear a straight cut suit from time to time even though it's not a common value in my group, simply because it was taught to me as a cultural value, not a fundamentalist biblical value. Others wear dress clothing that marks their cultural inheritance and I appreciate that as well.

The greater point I was attempting is that fundamentalism does not always deliver what it sets out to accomplish.

Ernie wrote: ↑Fri Apr 26, 2024 8:51 am

barnhart wrote: ↑Fri Apr 26, 2024 8:32 am Ernie, I'm not ready to say it's good or bad but I am pointing out it's not "staying the same" from a philosophical viewpoint and that shift likely has repercussions that should be considered as well.

Yes, I will be quick to say that there are some really negative repercussions.

However, in a world of very rapid change, I think there are good reasons for holding on to a culture, as long as it is not imposed on others who did not grow up with that culture. John D. Martin makes a case for this calling it "cultural capital". What John does not address is how we should best relate to/support Christians who did not grow up with the same cultural practices or folks with little cultural capital.

Is it your proposal that a multi-tiered system be encouraged, whereby the children of those folks with "little cultural capital" will inherit "little cultural capital" from their parents, whereas the children of those who have "abundant cultural capital" will inherit that "abundant cultural capital"?

Flawed as the conservative Mennonite community may be, the finances, emotions, and time invested in trying to help newcomers and their families assimilate into the community stands as a testament to a desire that the new community members will share in the cultural capital of the community. I'm not saying these attempts are always successful, but there certainly are sincere attempts being made.

Ernie wrote: ↑Fri Apr 26, 2024 8:51 am

barnhart wrote: ↑Fri Apr 26, 2024 8:32 am Ernie, I'm not ready to say it's good or bad but I am pointing out it's not "staying the same" from a philosophical viewpoint and that shift likely has repercussions that should be considered as well.

Yes, I will be quick to say that there are some really negative repercussions.

However, in a world of very rapid change, I think there are good reasons for holding on to a culture, as long as it is not imposed on others who did not grow up with that culture. John D. Martin makes a case for this calling it "cultural capital". What John does not address is how we should best relate to/support Christians who did not grow up with the same cultural practices or folks with little cultural capital.

I am more familiar with the term social capital than cultural capital. Social capital is often used to refer to those who have social connections that enable them to land jobs, get emergency care/support, etc.

However, is John saying, which I am sure he isn't, that one culture is better than another when he talks about more cultural capital? If he were, I can't quite go there. Folks have culture. Culture is different. But not sure it is an "ought" question so much as an "is" question. Unless one means more in the sense of social capital as I noted above...

joshuabgood wrote: ↑Fri Apr 26, 2024 1:47 pm

Ernie wrote: ↑Fri Apr 26, 2024 8:51 am

barnhart wrote: ↑Fri Apr 26, 2024 8:32 am Ernie, I'm not ready to say it's good or bad but I am pointing out it's not "staying the same" from a philosophical viewpoint and that shift likely has repercussions that should be considered as well.

Yes, I will be quick to say that there are some really negative repercussions.

However, in a world of very rapid change, I think there are good reasons for holding on to a culture, as long as it is not imposed on others who did not grow up with that culture. John D. Martin makes a case for this calling it "cultural capital". What John does not address is how we should best relate to/support Christians who did not grow up with the same cultural practices or folks with little cultural capital.

I am more familiar with the term social capital than cultural capital. Social capital is often used to refer to those who have social connections that enable them to land jobs, get emergency care/support, etc.

However, is John saying, which I am sure he isn't, that one culture is better than another when he talks about more cultural capital? If he were, I can't quite go there. Folks have culture. Culture is different. But not sure it is an "ought" question so much as an "is" question. Unless one means more in the sense of social capital as I noted above...

Some cultures are clearly better than others, though none are perfect. I’d proffer that Conservative Mennonite culture is better for drawing man towards God and thus fulfilling one’s purpose qua man than is modern American culture, Honduran culture, etc.

If no culture is better than another culture, then it's not accurate to use the word "culture" to describe a lifestyle formed by intentional choices to live according to God's will.

ken_sylvania wrote: ↑Fri Apr 26, 2024 2:33 pm If no culture is better than another culture, then it's not accurate to use the word "culture" to describe a lifestyle formed by intentional choices to live according to God's will.

Right...though I think the term "God's will" needs some elucidating. Is the straight cut coat say, God's will?

I’d proffer that Conservative Mennonite culture is better for drawing man towards God and thus fulfilling one’s purpose qua man than is modern American culture, Honduran culture, etc.

This would be a good topic for conversation in its own right.