Eastern Mennonite’s Liberty Ridge Farm

[Biblical Anabaptist]

Well, Pilgrim isn’t really any different. Fellowships on the other hand tend to have members vote on it.

Pilgrim is a Conference. Aaron Shank was very much pushing that Pilgrim be a conference when it formed. Eastern is technically a conferring fellowship in that members vote for changes to the discipline. However (1) when a vote is taken on an issue, there is a meeting where there is a "sermon" stating why the change should be made, strongly influencing the vote. (2) the discipline is a "minimum standard". Each bishop is allowed to make whatever additional rules in his district he wants to make.

Is this done without the approval/consent of the rest of the Ministry or Congregations?

I don't know what all goes on behind the scenes, but I believe that is usually the case. I have heard of situations where a minister would stand up to a bishop and say he is not going to enforce a particular bishop's wishes. It would definitely not get congregational input unless there was a member pushing for a more conservative stance on an issue.

[ken_sylvania]

Well, Pilgrim isn’t really any different. Fellowships on the other hand tend to have members vote on it.

Pilgrim is a Conference. Aaron Shank was very much pushing that Pilgrim be a conference when it formed. Eastern is technically a conferring fellowship in that members vote for changes to the discipline. However (1) when a vote is taken on an issue, there is a meeting where there is a "sermon" stating why the change should be made, strongly influencing the vote. (2) the discipline is a "minimum standard". Each bishop is allowed to make whatever additional rules in his district he wants to make.

Is this done without the approval/consent of the rest of the Ministry or Congregations?

Not generally. And the description of the discipline as the "minimum standard" simply means that members are free to/encouraged to hold to a higher standard for themselves and their families individually. It has nothing to do with individual bishops requiring anything above and beyond the standard.

[JayP]

I don't want this to come across disrespectfully. I think some of the follow up comments on Pilgrim/EPMC are technically correct but effectively irrelevant. Officially terming the structure of Pilgrim or EPMC is meaningless. In reality, Fellowship really is a conferring situation. By that I mean, regardless of the theoretical definitions, there is balance between leadership and membership. EPMC is "conferring" and holds conferring meetings carefully scripted by the Bishops. EPMC is run by their bishop board, supported by the ministry along a system I'd best describe as a Politboro.

Now, that sounds awfully cruel. I don't mean it that way. I do honestly and without emotion think that is pretty descriptive. EPMC leadership would shudder that the membership might EVER vote on something in a way different than the ministers want. It's a terrible flaw in Eastern. For example, they believe in the lot for ministry selections BUT......regularly 'persuade' folks nominated to drop out. They trust God's decision on who gets ordained (officially) but seem to feel God needs a lot of help.

The idea that their membership might need to take up collections to pay off for mistakes made with Liberty Ridge, but never fully reveal the facts to their members is to me, very troublesome.

Much of the recent tensions in EPMC come from a growing awareness over an awakening that the bishops aren't necessarily always playing fair.

[Judas Maccabeus]

I don't want this to come across disrespectfully. I think some of the follow up comments on Pilgrim/EPMC are technically correct but effectively irrelevant. Officially terming the structure of Pilgrim or EPMC is meaningless. In reality, Fellowship really is a conferring situation. By that I mean, regardless of the theoretical definitions, there is balance between leadership and membership. EPMC is "conferring" and holds conferring meetings carefully scripted by the Bishops. EPMC is run by their bishop board, supported by the ministry along a system I'd best describe as a Politboro.

Now, that sounds awfully cruel. I don't mean it that way. I do honestly and without emotion think that is pretty descriptive. EPMC leadership would shudder that the membership might EVER vote on something in a way different than the ministers want. It's a terrible flaw in Eastern. For example, they believe in the lot for ministry selections BUT......regularly 'persuade' folks nominated to drop out. They trust God's decision on who gets ordained (officially) but seem to feel God needs a lot of help.

The idea that their membership might need to take up collections to pay off for mistakes made with Liberty Ridge, but never fully reveal the facts to their members is to me, very troublesome.

Much of the recent tensions in EPMC come from a growing awareness over an awakening that the bishops aren't necessarily always playing fair.

This appears to be in the DNA of the conference from the founding. The Homer Bomberger/Mid Atlantic split was emblematic of that.

[Ken]

I don't want this to come across disrespectfully. I think some of the follow up comments on Pilgrim/EPMC are technically correct but effectively irrelevant. Officially terming the structure of Pilgrim or EPMC is meaningless. In reality, Fellowship really is a conferring situation. By that I mean, regardless of the theoretical definitions, there is balance between leadership and membership. EPMC is "conferring" and holds conferring meetings carefully scripted by the Bishops. EPMC is run by their bishop board, supported by the ministry along a system I'd best describe as a Politboro.

Now, that sounds awfully cruel. I don't mean it that way. I do honestly and without emotion think that is pretty descriptive. EPMC leadership would shudder that the membership might EVER vote on something in a way different than the ministers want. It's a terrible flaw in Eastern. For example, they believe in the lot for ministry selections BUT......regularly 'persuade' folks nominated to drop out. They trust God's decision on who gets ordained (officially) but seem to feel God needs a lot of help.

The idea that their membership might need to take up collections to pay off for mistakes made with Liberty Ridge, but never fully reveal the facts to their members is to me, very troublesome.

Much of the recent tensions in EPMC come from a growing awareness over an awakening that the bishops aren't necessarily always playing fair.

Is there a payout happening?

All I saw on the news posted here was that the lawsuit was dropped. But I suppose if there was some sort of out-of-court settlement involving a payout it might actually sense at some level for it to be confidential as those sorts of things usually are. Both sides often prefer it that way so they don't have to talk about and revisit it in public.

[JayP]

I don't object to folks not rehashing it in public if there has been a settlement that satisfies all parties.

I do object (well if I was a member I would) that it's not discussed openly enough when they ask for donations to PAY the settlement.

I can't say that's definitively what's happenning in Eastern, but it sure seems like it is.

[Josh]

I don't object to folks not rehashing it in public if there has been a settlement that satisfies all parties.

I do object (well if I was a member I would) that it's not discussed openly enough when they ask for donations to PAY the settlement.

I can't say that's definitively what's happenning in Eastern, but it sure seems like it is.

Eastern seems to be run like a government intelligence agency - everything works on a "need to know basis", and generally speaking, you don't call them, they'll call you.

[RZehr]

I don't object to folks not rehashing it in public if there has been a settlement that satisfies all parties.

I do object (well if I was a member I would) that it's not discussed openly enough when they ask for donations to PAY the settlement.

I can't say that's definitively what's happenning in Eastern, but it sure seems like it is.

Eastern seems to be run like a government intelligence agency - everything works on a "need to know basis", and generally speaking, you don't call them, they'll call you.

Well, didn’t they think you were a secret government agent?

[steve-in-kville]

I don't object to folks not rehashing it in public if there has been a settlement that satisfies all parties.

I do object (well if I was a member I would) that it's not discussed openly enough when they ask for donations to PAY the settlement.

I can't say that's definitively what's happenning in Eastern, but it sure seems like it is.

Eastern seems to be run like a government intelligence agency - everything works on a "need to know basis", and generally speaking, you don't call them, they'll call you.

Well, didn’t they think you were a secret government agent?

Bonus points if you actually got followed around!

[Josh]

#1, it was actually Mid-West adherents and unaffiliated Charity-esque types (who were ousted from official Charity circles) who tended to believe that. Some still do.

#2, no, I don’t think I’ve ever been followed. Well, other than when I cut off the pizza delivery guy and he followed me as I drove around in circles a few times.