The Brotherhood Filter

[lesterb]

I used this label one time in a book or essay I wrote (I forget which) and got some feedback on it.

Reading this threadmade me remember that. Brotherhood is something I've always felt to be important. I think even leaders in a congregation should pay close attention to what the brotherhood is comfortable with or uncomfortable with. Yet I have also experienced time that I was pretty uncomfortable with what a brotherhood came up with.

So a brotherhood filter is a bit like your conscience. It can be trained to be comfortable with the status quo. So if a leader or a conference does enough teaching, etc., they can bend the brotherhood filter to their liking. Or someone else with a lot of influence might do the same.

So how do we bring this all together? We are facing a situation where a strongly influential person has become part of the church and seems to be determined to remake the face of the group.

So when do we trust the brotherhood filter. And when don't we? And how do we know when to submit and when we should speak up? And how do we know whether our convictions on issues like Ernie mentioned in the other thread are something we need to hold to at all costs, even if it breaks up a group, or destroys another brother?

[Hats Off]

So a brotherhood filter is a bit like your conscience. It can be trained to be comfortable with the status quo. So if a leader or a conference does enough teaching, etc., they can bend the brotherhood filter to their liking. Or someone else with a lot of influence might do the same.

I have seen where one strong leader says "That is not Anabaptist." Since he is an Anabaptist expert, his word carries. Unfortunately, most of the time when that happens, the attitude is not Anabaptist.

So how do we bring this all together? We are facing a situation where a strongly influential person has become part of the church and seems to be determined to remake the face of the group.

I would suggest the problem is not with the influential person - but with the people that allow him to take over.

So when do we trust the brotherhood filter. And when don't we? And how do we know when to submit and when we should speak up? And how do we know whether our convictions on issues like Ernie mentioned in the other thread are something we need to hold to at all costs, even if it breaks up a group, or destroys another brother?

So much depends on the leadership - with relatively strong leadership that has a sense of the brotherhood, we should be able to trust the filter. If there is enough common ground between the majority of the brotherhood and the leadership, one or two dissenters "should not" be able to break up a group.

[Sudsy]

In times past, God has raised up an individual to get the "brotherhood" out of a rut in their Christianity. Some church splits (i.e. Anabaptism) resulted in renewed interest in following Jesus. However, regardless of how we attempt to remake the church or not remake the church into our likings/convictions, God is able to build His Church.

No doubt there are people that are extremely more influential and persuasive in what they wish a brotherhood be and do than others. Which of these is man's leadings and which are God's ? Ideally I believe Jesus wanted us to be more reflective of a common church where love and unity reigned. However, with our ability to chose not taken from us, we will not see this ideal until His Kingdom comes in fullness to this earth.

I just returned to an MB church that went through a major split a few years ago. A new direction to reach the current generation involved things the older generation couldn't adapt to. Now this church is growing and reaching out to the local community in various ways that likely would never have happened should they have stayed the course. Many leaders in the brotherhood gave up and left back then. But God is continuing to build His Church through those who remained and through new converts. I don't see these splits as troublesome as I once did although I have had to make adjustments to my comfortableness.