MennoNet.com

Wade wrote:(Speaking of twisting of words: Josh, either I come across completely wrong or you really need to stop implying things like you think you understand. My wife isn't right now wearing a kapp but has worn them a bunch and she is almost always in a cape dress - so your statement about those people being cold and godless is absolutely ridiculous and completely the opposite of what I was actually trying to say... )

Wade, a lot of conversations you have on MN end up with you talking about the bad experiences you had at one particular church.

I think you need to let it go.

We were afraid, I think, that it would have looked as though we were guaranteeing to look after them in order to persuade them to join us. And of course, thrifty Mennonites would not want to encourage dependency.

Sometimes I wonder what seekers are supposed to do. They have to get rid of insurance to join the church. Yet they also must be “self sufficient” and not rely on their new brotherhood for needs. If they try to rely on their own way to provide for needs, that’s not acceptable to the church. They’re in a real Catch-22.

Going back to the topic of this thread, I used to go to a church where plain coats were the norm. When I was about to become a member, I asked 3 men about where to get one. One told me he doesn’t like plain coats so don’t wear one. Another one told me not to bother because he wants the standard to go away. The third one (who was NMB), felt I was descending into legalism and pride, and ultimately disfellowshipped me for 12 months (long story why... he was under some very bad spiritual influences that thankfully the Lord led him out of and my relationship with him has since been restored).

I’m glad I’m at a church now which doesn’t require me to wear clothes I’m simultaneously told wearing is an expression of pride, or else is old fashioned and needs to go away. It really can feel like rigid plain dress often serves no purpose except to keep seekers out, even though I know that’s not the purpose.

Josh wrote:

Wade wrote:(Speaking of twisting of words: Josh, either I come across completely wrong or you really need to stop implying things like you think you understand. My wife isn't right now wearing a kapp but has worn them a bunch and she is almost always in a cape dress - so your statement about those people being cold and godless is absolutely ridiculous and completely the opposite of what I was actually trying to say... )

Wade, a lot of conversations you have on MN end up with you talking about the bad experiences you had at one particular church.

I think you need to let it go.

And, you prove my point again.

Okay. What are you trying to say?

Josh wrote:Okay. What are you trying to say?

I'm not sure I can say it right... I really struggle to say anything without relating it to some experience or reality. I grew up in front of a TV and only read a couple books before my early 20's, with parents not interested in talking about much anything deeper than what is only on the surface...
So, I ask for your forgiveness and patience in trying to explain how social status and a sectarian spirit of caterogizing people or groups can be part of what has become of the evolution of plain dress. I don't intend to sound resentful or even talk bad about others, but rather am trying to show that not following exacting church dress standards can be viewed as disobedience and individualism from one view because of experience, but could be viewed as social status and sectarianism from another because of experience.
It's not that one experience is better than the other but rather that we as Christians should be using our experiences (as I believe God intended) to compliment one another. Too often we use them to seperate one another..
Like I've said it is like the very things keeping Anabaptism what it is, is what is keeping it from what it was... Hope that makes sense...

Josh wrote:

We were afraid, I think, that it would have looked as though we were guaranteeing to look after them in order to persuade them to join us. And of course, thrifty Mennonites would not want to encourage dependency.

Sometimes I wonder what seekers are supposed to do. They have to get rid of insurance to join the church. Yet they also must be “self sufficient” and not rely on their new brotherhood for needs. If they try to rely on their own way to provide for needs, that’s not acceptable to the church. They’re in a real Catch-22.

That's exactly it Josh.
Its like what is keeping Anabaptism what it is, is what is keeping it from what it was.

Wade wrote: I'm not sure I can say it right... I really struggle to say anything without relating it to some experience or reality. I grew up in front of a TV and only read a couple books before my early 20's, with parents not interested in talking about much anything deeper than what is only on the surface...
So, I ask for your forgiveness and patience in trying to explain how social status and a sectarian spirit of caterogizing people or groups can be part of what has become of the evolution of plain dress. I don't intend to sound resentful or even talk bad about others, but rather am trying to show that not following exacting church dress standards can be viewed as disobedience and individualism from one view because of experience, but could be viewed as social status and sectarianism from another because of experience.
It's not that one experience is better than the other but rather that we as Christians should be using our experiences (as I believe God intended) to compliment one another. Too often we use them to seperate one another..
Like I've said it is like the very things keeping Anabaptism what it is, is what is keeping it from what it was... Hope that makes sense...

This makes a lot of sense to me. Especially the bolded.

Ernie wrote:

Wade wrote: I'm not sure I can say it right... I really struggle to say anything without relating it to some experience or reality. I grew up in front of a TV and only read a couple books before my early 20's, with parents not interested in talking about much anything deeper than what is only on the surface...
So, I ask for your forgiveness and patience in trying to explain how social status and a sectarian spirit of caterogizing people or groups can be part of what has become of the evolution of plain dress. I don't intend to sound resentful or even talk bad about others, but rather am trying to show that not following exacting church dress standards can be viewed as disobedience and individualism from one view because of experience, but could be viewed as social status and sectarianism from another because of experience.
It's not that one experience is better than the other but rather that we as Christians should be using our experiences (as I believe God intended) to compliment one another. Too often we use them to seperate one another..
Like I've said it is like the very things keeping Anabaptism what it is, is what is keeping it from what it was... Hope that makes sense...

This makes a lot of sense to me. Especially the bolded.

Ernie, since it does make sense to you (it does to me as well, incidentally), what do you suggest as taking steps to find a solution for this? Or would you be of the mind that what Anabaptism is NOW is preferable to what it WAS?

Wade what you say does make a lot of sense to me.

What is disheartening to me is that when some of us do try to speak out for change we are accused of simply pushing the line or even worse simply wanting to throw everything away.