MennoNet.com

This thread is sort of a catch all for discussing the beliefs, values, and practices of various conservative Anabaptist and Plain constituencies, their similarities, and their differences.

Over the next year I hope to start threads on different constituencies. I list links to some threads below and will add more as we go along.

I'm defining a constituency as a group of churches who share pulpits and might also work together on joint publications, education, ministries, etc.

Ultra Conservative Mennonite
Intermediate Conservative Mennonite
Moderate Conservative Mennonite
Progressive Conservative Mennonite
Theologically Conservative Mennonite

If this is a catch all thread, I hope I'm not out of place for asking which groups apply the verses on excommunication to being a literal not eating regular food and communion and refrain from speaking to excommunicated people unless within the realms of repentance?

Normally the old order churches, both car and horse and buggy, do not practice the strict bann. We even seem to have a category called non-communing members which to me seems to be an oxymoron. In my mind non-communing and member are mutually exclusive terms. Excommunicated members are usually not allowed to eat at the family table with ministry at weddings and funerals.

Hats Off wrote:Normally the old order churches, both car and horse and buggy, do not practice the strict bann. We even seem to have a category called non-communing members which to me seems to be an oxymoron. In my mind non-communing and member are mutually exclusive terms. Excommunicated members are usually not allowed to eat at the family table with ministry at weddings and funerals.

This refers to the large Old Order Mennonite groups.
There are smaller Old Order Mennonite groups that might have a different practice.
Then there are OO Amish, OO German Baptists, OO River Brethren, ...

Sorry - I forgot to include the word Mennonite. I can only speak for old order Mennonite groups and not very well for the smaller fringes.

From some other threads...

Ernie wrote:

appleman2006 wrote:So I am curious Ernie. Were the descriptions of the four groups of churches your own?

The descriptions are my own. My goal was to be factual.
The motive is to provide people looking to join a Mennonite church with a realistic view of what to expect from this church in terms of non-conformity. I find many seekers are very disillusioned when what was presented to them verbally is different from what they experience functionally as a part of the church.
I realize now that I didn't include a sales pitch for each group. I could still do that.
Eventually I would like to write a book about the plain world and identify realities that are not generally talked about. If this ever materializes, I would want to include both the positive and the negative aspects of each constituency.

Josh wrote:Ernie’s descriptions seem spot on accurate and help me understand experiences I have had.
It’s quite fair to inform seekers of what future to expect. Very few seekers feel following Jesus means joining a highly conservative church today which will be a lot more like the world in 20 years.

Martin wrote:So, Ernie did say the "Readers Digest would be seen by most Ultra Conservatives as having enough worldly influence that it wouldn’t be worth reading". I think the "most" part could be an inaccurate stereotype for W-F as are other statements.

Yes, a better word would have been, “the majority”

My descriptions have to do with the constituency as a whole, not the individual conferences or fellowships.
I'm defining a constituency as a group of churches who share pulpits and might also work together on joint publications, education, ministries, etc.
My descriptions have to do with the general direction or ethos of the constituency and are intended to paint in broad brush strokes what a person might experience if he interacted broadly within a given constituency.

There are individuals and elements within a constituency that are exceptions or a minority, and they might fit better in a different constituency. But for reasons of practicality or the preferences of their relatives, they many continue fellowshipping with the constituency they were born into.
Others will leave at some point to join up with a constituency that more accurately reflects their worldview.

Thanks for your input on my various threads about Mennonite constituencies.

I've updated my document to make it more useful to the curious and the seekers.

You can read it here.
Overview of the Plain People and Some Guidance for Seekers

Someday we will need to morph Dan Z's contributions into this but that will need to wait till another time.

PeterG wrote:I interact regularly with people from six different Keystone congregations. It should be noted that Keystone is a fairly diverse group. It includes people who might fit in in a Pilgrim or Western Fellowship church, and people who might fit in a Lancaster Conference or CMC church, sometimes in the same congregation.

I think this describes the "Old" Mennonite church in the 1950's - 1970's, before the conservative groups started pulling out and starting their own conferences. The "Old" Mennonite Church refers to the majority of plain conservative Mennonites in the late 19th century and first half of the 20th century. It refers to the conferences who sent representatives to the Mennonite General Conference (a meeting).
These folks are distinct from General Conference Mennonites/General Conference Mennonite Church (a conference) that was organized by John Oberholtzer in the 1860's.
Yes it can be very confusing.
As the conservatives pulled out of the "Old" Mennonite church, many of the remaining conferences quickly adapted to the times and nearly caught up with General Conference worldview and practices by 2002. In 2002 the two groups merged and formed MC USA.

But back to the quote from PeterG, I'm amazed at the diversity of Keystone. Most conservative Anabaptists are not able to commune, share pulpits with people of such diversity.

Wade wrote:Ernie, could you help me to understand who you are talking about when you reference plain people? Is it across the entire spectrum? Is it the theological conservatives, or ultras, or?
Because the continued theme over especially the last year or so on Mennonet is getting to be a greater and greater liberal reactionary type representation compared to the loving Conservative Mennonites I know. I'm honestly growing in my aversion to anything less than Ultra Conservatives including Mennonet with the way CA's are continually misrepresented as I know them.

When I refer to "Plain People", I am referring to Old Order and Conservative Mennonites, Amish, Hutterites, and Brethren who practice separation from the world, modest dress, head-covering for women, non-participation in the military, etc.
It would include everyone in the following article from Old Order to Progressive Conservative. It would not include Theological Conservatives, Mainline Anabaptists, nor Progressive Anabaptists.
https://www.churchplantersforum.org/wp- ... People.pdf

As I mention in the article above, many moderate-conservatives and progressive-conservatives are transitioning to Evangelical churches. The same is happening in some Old Order settings.
Because of this, many of the values mentioned in the following article are being lost because they are not being promoted or implemented in the homes of many moderate-conservatives and progressive conservatives.
It only takes one generation to destroy the values that their ancestors accumulated over many centuries. Conversely, in one generation a family can begin instilling values that have not been present in their lineage for many centuries. This is the good news.

https://www.churchplantersforum.org/wp- ... st-Eby.pdf

Ernie wrote: As I mention in the article above, many moderate-conservatives and progressive-conservatives are transitioning to Evangelical churches. The same is happening in some Old Order settings.

This is the first time I've seen Old Orders on that list. Are there some Old Order settings that are more transitional than others?
(I suppose "everyone" was Old Order at one point, with the exception of NMB families who come into groups that are no longer Old Order.)