Discerning "why" Seekers come

[Josh]

JM’s congregation is unique. There are a few similar ones like York and Bradford out there. There are a few older congregations with a surprising number of NMB like Bastrop. And the there are a few groups like Old Order River Brethren that have a lot of NMB. I am eager to refer seekers, converts, and not-yet-converted people coming under conviction or seeking to change their life away to these specific congregations. I know they will be able to find Jesus there and loving people there.

Sectarian groups tend to have a bit more NMB.
Sometimes, one particular congregation will bring in a lot of NMB. This happened with the Holdemans in a church in TN, at one point almost half, and the last names of people from there tend not to be familiar to me. Likewise an ACC Nazarean Church in Cleveland has a few NMB, all of whom married in. I hope non-sectarian Anabaptists will study these groups some day and learn why they are attracting and keeping NMB a little better.

Seekers may have to compromise in order to choose a fellowship with a proven track record of keeping NMB. If one’s dream is to be an Eastern, one will have to become fully Eastern. I would compare it to moving to another country. One needs to learn the language and adapt almost like a chameleon to another culture if one wants to “fit in”.

[Mennogal]

Let me say this another way:

• - for Conservative Anabaptists, what we are doing should not primarily be about maintaining safe ethno-cultural boundaries, but about living together as Salt & Light as we faithfully follow Christ...and welcoming & discipling others to join us in that quest.
  - for seekers drawn to Conservative Anabaptist churches, this should not primarily be about trying to be a part of an alternative culture or lifestyle, but about surrendering to the cause of Christ, and joining with other believers in seeking to live out a faithful witness for his Kingdom.

Anything else and we end up in the weeds!

The seekers point is precisely why I come here to learn and why I am intrigued by the Anabaptist faith. I wish to live into being Anabaptist as it were, not to wear bonnets and simple dress per se, but to be a follower of Christ, the one and only. And part of that is converting to a more simplistic life for me, so guidance in that is always welcomed. A strong community is also quite important to me; I was an Episcopal sister for over two years!

[temporal1]

Just glanced through this thread again. It's interesting to see these opinions. But I also note that some people paint with a pretty broad brush. If I would share some of the things I've experienced with NMB's and the heartaches they have given me in the past, I suppose many of you would say I just don't understand.

I suspect that some of us understand a lot more than we're given credit for. But we also see the other side of the story sometimes. So many of these accounts assume that it is always the church and the "system" that is wrong. Well the church is made up of humans, and thus makes mistakes. But the last time I checked most NMB's were human as well and might also make a few mistakes.

We had a an old parable in German that doesn't sound the same in English:
Net du bautavad us ain aisel un onthra aisel lany audich heist.
Not sure if anyone can get that - it's transliterated. In English it more or less means

“There is no use of one donkey calling another donkey long-eared."

What I'm trying to say is, lets give each other the benefit of the doubt. You fail, and I fail.

But since you came into the church, it isn't such a big deal to go back to where you came from.
Those of us who were born there really don't have any place to go the feels better than where we are, so we end up swallowing the weaknesses and trying to live for Christ where we are.

I've got a ton of stuff on my plate right now, so I'm gone again....

Some of us come because we have no place to go back to.

You are not alone.
Where we came from is no more. We would not consider it even if it were possible.
J.M.

Wade, you are spot-on. by different members, in different words, this has been discussed somewhat on forum. in recent years, churches have gone through abrupt changes, alienating membership, many are floundering. lester’s words about, “you can just go back,” are not true today as they might have been, not long ago.

the up-side:
we are being forced to actively seek, to leave our comfort zones, to not sleep, not to take for granted.
in truth, from scriptures, this is the preferred state of “Followers of The Way.”
it’s our human nature to mourn what is lost .. but, Jesus implores to leave “all that” behind, anyway, to follow Him.

[Wade]

I think I have now observed that there maybe two types of seekers that are zealously attracted to Anabaptism: Reactionists and Biblicists.

I believe most of us are actually both to an extent but lean harder one way or the other.

[Ernie]

Interesting. Can you describe the reactionists?

[Wade]

Interesting. Can you describe the reactionists?

A reactionist does and says things more as a reaction against something.

By my definition a religious reactionist has more of a motive towards not drifting or not conforming to the ways of the world rather than purely for obedience to Christ.

To put it another way; a reactionist may very well be running from evil or wanting to be separated from the world but that can be more of the focus rather than a focus of being seperated unto God.

I think I can see that certain upbringings/backgrounds promote reactionism which can drive a person for one example to more of an "us versus them" mentality, making them at times more committed to brotherhood and strong acceptance of lines of affiliation.

Reactionists can be prone to liking polemic. "A polemic is contentious rhetoric that is intended to support a specific position by aggressive claims and undermining of the opposing position. Polemics are mostly seen in arguments about controversial topics. " Or even rhetoric less aggressive than polemic.

I'll add; the problem is certain upbringings/backgrounds are strongly opposed to reactionism and when reactionism is allowed to go on or is even preached/promoted from the pulpit, a "seeker" focused more on truth can become quite confused and discouraged from being part of that group.

[Josh]

There is a third kind: some of us just got born again, and happened to do so in a conservative Anabaptist church. Once you've been in CA circles a while, Christianity anywhere else doesn't feel very comfortable or legitimate.

[YorkandAdams]

Interesting. Can you describe the reactionists?

A reactionist does and says things more as a reaction against something.

By my definition a religious reactionist has more of a motive towards not drifting or not conforming to the ways of the world rather than purely for obedience to Christ.

To put it another way; a reactionist may very well be running from evil or wanting to be separated from the world but that can be more of the focus rather than a focus of being seperated unto God.

I think I can see that certain upbringings/backgrounds promote reactionism which can drive a person for one example to more of an "us versus them" mentality, making them at times more committed to brotherhood and strong acceptance of lines of affiliation.

Reactionists can be prone to liking polemic. "A polemic is contentious rhetoric that is intended to support a specific position by aggressive claims and undermining of the opposing position. Polemics are mostly seen in arguments about controversial topics. " Or even rhetoric less aggressive than polemic.

I'll add; the problem is certain upbringings/backgrounds are strongly opposed to reactionism and when reactionism is allowed to go on or is even preached/promoted from the pulpit, a "seeker" focused more on truth can become quite confused and discouraged from being part of that group.

I agree that there is a potential danger in becoming a "reactionist" (by your definition), but many (including myself) have seen that there is often good reason to be concerned when these shifts happen. With every change in the application, one should honestly be asking themselves if the change is to become more biblical or more worldly. In my observation, it is usually the latter.

And to your point on seekers, I believe that the danger is present, but it is no more dangerous than attending a church which is doing the opposite. Groups which are loosening church standards are often "reactionary" in nature as well. They are reacting to the sentiment of the people within the church. Often wanting to be less separate in dress and action from the world. Whether this is biblical is matter of opinion, but I would argue that it is rarely as successful as what was originally intended and often does more harm than good.

[Wade]

Interesting. Can you describe the reactionists?

A reactionist does and says things more as a reaction against something.

By my definition a religious reactionist has more of a motive towards not drifting or not conforming to the ways of the world rather than purely for obedience to Christ.

To put it another way; a reactionist may very well be running from evil or wanting to be separated from the world but that can be more of the focus rather than a focus of being seperated unto God.

I think I can see that certain upbringings/backgrounds promote reactionism which can drive a person for one example to more of an "us versus them" mentality, making them at times more committed to brotherhood and strong acceptance of lines of affiliation.

Reactionists can be prone to liking polemic. "A polemic is contentious rhetoric that is intended to support a specific position by aggressive claims and undermining of the opposing position. Polemics are mostly seen in arguments about controversial topics. " Or even rhetoric less aggressive than polemic.

I'll add; the problem is certain upbringings/backgrounds are strongly opposed to reactionism and when reactionism is allowed to go on or is even preached/promoted from the pulpit, a "seeker" focused more on truth can become quite confused and discouraged from being part of that group.

I agree that there is a potential danger in becoming a "reactionist" (by your definition), but many (including myself) have seen that there is often good reason to be concerned when these shifts happen. With every change in the application, one should honestly be asking themselves if the change is to become more biblical or more worldly. In my observation, it is usually the latter.

And to your point on seekers, I believe that the danger is present, but it is no more dangerous than attending a church which is doing the opposite. Groups which are loosening church standards are often "reactionary" in nature as well. They are reacting to the sentiment of the people within the church. Often wanting to be less separate in dress and action from the world. Whether this is biblical is matter of opinion, but I would argue that it is rarely as successful as what was originally intended and often does more harm than good.

I agree, with you. But maybe to help understand this better I can say a bit more:

Sorry for the generalizations that may not fit everyone....

I don't think a certain level of reactionism is always wrong. And those seekers that have Mennonite and/or Protestant backgrounds seem way more prone to it and for good reasons often. And lots seem to not even be aware they are doing it.

However, from my experience I would have to say often reactionsim is a turnoff to the seeker with a Catholic background. I can't speak for them as to exactly why, but I do know that I have not heard of them speak in polemic in church or even outside it typically.

And for the unchurched or atheist that is looking for truth, they will regonize embelishing stories or exagarations about others lie in the realm of deceit and will likely rather reject the person talking in such a way. They want to know why an application or theology is right because it is true - and not because others are wrong.
For example the comments on here recently about the rapture being "wildly unbiblical" is a perfect example of reactionism. The unchurched or atheist background person is very confused by such comments because we want to know more what is true than what isn't.

I think recognizing some of these things could help with how we approach people and understand each other is all...

[Josh]

The unchurched or atheist (such as I used to be) is, believe me, very turned off by such nonsense ideas as a “mid trib rapture” and often is put off from belief at all if they think to be a Christian, they have to believe such things.

Better to focus on the gospel and keep such minutiae out of the program for new believers - and for established ones.