Standards vs Reality

[Neto]

As far as standards go, I FULLY believe in conviction way way above standards.
....
I formed my own convictions. I have an idea but never read the standards at my church on media. Apparently, we are doing it.

Amen and this is where I have trouble with some conservative concepts of Christian practise. A belief is personal convictions is often considered too individual. Anabaptism is at war with individualism. That is thought to be the weakness of Evangelicalism and progressive Anabaptists. Other believers as a group are to decide what to do and what not to do or else we can't be part of their fellowship. Whether one agrees with these rules as a personal conviction doesn't matter. Romans 14 seems just too conflicting with allowing individuals the right to follow God as they are convicted and still be part of a fellowship. This control on other believers is viewed as a way of caring for one another's spiritual growth and/or avoidance from sinning and/or keeping the church pure. The Holy Spirit then is not allowed to work individually to convict of sin over one's lifetime and is replaced by an extra biblical definition of sinning that must be adhered to.
....

I know that what you have described is too often the case, or it certainly seems so, but I don't think that attitude represents true anabaptism, or, shall we say, the early anabaptists' attitude. I am of course from Mennonite background, but more so the "individualist" kind (I suppose some here would say). But what I see in early anabaptism is not the group or its leaders controlling the members to make them adhere to a set of rules or standards, but a group of people who individually came to the same conclusions, and individually agreed to the standards by which they all lived. And that is what I came looking for. Oh, I fellowship with some who don't like or agree with all of the congregational standards, and I don't agree with all of them either. (Now-a-days, mostly I take a more reserved approach than what seems to be the majority opinion on a number of matters.) As I understand the chain of historical events, even the statements of faith were written more to explain beliefs to outsiders than to control or dictate the beliefs of those within.

[Sudsy]

I know that what you have described is too often the case, or it certainly seems so, but I don't think that attitude represents true anabaptism, or, shall we say, the early anabaptists' attitude. I am of course from Mennonite background, but more so the "individualist" kind (I suppose some here would say). But what I see in early anabaptism is not the group or its leaders controlling the members to make them adhere to a set of rules or standards, but a group of people who individually came to the same conclusions, and individually agreed to the standards by which they all lived. And that is what I came looking for. Oh, I fellowship with some who don't like or agree with all of the congregational standards, and I don't agree with all of them either. (Now-a-days, mostly I take a more reserved approach than what seems to be the majority opinion on a number of matters.) As I understand the chain of historical events, even the statements of faith were written more to explain beliefs to outsiders than to control or dictate the beliefs of those within.

Thanks Neto. So if early Anabaptism was not a control issue, it sounds like it became a control issue for some over time. Is it correct to say that early Anabaptism allowed for personal convictions and over time a certain similar way of living resulted from these convictions but then these areas of similar conviction were written down and at some point became required convictions/rules/standards for membership and fellowship ?

One problem I have with group convictions is what you said that not everyone really has those convictions. Those people will sign on to follow them to belong to the group. Ibelieve the early church was a member of the local church the moment one became a member of The Church, was born again. I don't see any further qualifying for local church membership in the NT. That would have to come from tradition.

However, I am going to take the MB membership course shortly (2 nights) to see just what kind of agreement or covenant and privileges our local church has and how it is enforced. I have no problem with the MB statement of faith that would cause me to dis-associate from that statement. But regarding any church covenant, my view, which I believe to be scriptural, is that the only covenant we need to follow is the New Covenant and defining things beyond that should not be required for fellowship. However, if this is just a general statement regarding NT working as a community that we will, by God's grace, attempt to follow, I will likely go through this official membership thing and become a member. As it is I have our own church mailbox, signed up for automatic bank withdrawals for giving, can attend all congregational meetings but without a vote, can take communion, in the church directory, have pastoral visits and am well treated as if I already am a formal member.

But some traditions are not worth resisting unless I must commit to something I cannot follow. I guess my age has changed my perspective on how important it is to be a non-conformer in some areas. I know I would never agree to membership requirements of the more Conservative Anabaptist groups represented on this forum. But as Romans 14 says, we need to allow for how each one of us serves our Master.

[Judas Maccabeus]

The biggest shock: People don't just come to church. Members are expected to participate in all aspects of the church itself. I know that sounds a bit weird to say. No probs helping church clean ups / construction / maint / and such, that's normal. Other stuff such as any member brother can give a message (and is sometimes asked to), brothers giving devotions (expected to)... Some of that goes a bit far I think, or at least it is unknown to NMB folks. Just because somebody wants to go to a Menno church doesn't mean they want to become a preacher. It doesn't mean they want to be a bench warmer either.... I don't know how to explain it -> my tone of voice is not ugly in typing this btw, it is just kind of like "what?? - I didn't come here to preach". This is baked in with several Menno cultures apparently, and some not. I just tell my wife "Apparently Mennonites love speeches".

I was from a church where only a few people did anything, and the rest were bench warmers. I was used to doing all of these things, so it was no big deal, it is done on rotation in my current church. My biggest fear was being consigned to being a bench warmer. In many evangelical churches today, there is such an emphasis in young, right out of school types, the guy 20 years older than the pastor is likely to get sidelined, especially if he does not have a beard.

What I like about the culture is that everyone pitches in without complaining! Church clean ups, construction, maint and such was a problem, and you should have heard the complaints.

I was looking for what apparently shocked you. You must realize that the next preacher, if he is drawn by lot may well be any man in the congregation so it is perhaps better to start training them early.

J.M.

[Chris]

The biggest shock: People don't just come to church. Members are expected to participate in all aspects of the church itself. I know that sounds a bit weird to say. No probs helping church clean ups / construction / maint / and such, that's normal. Other stuff such as any member brother can give a message (and is sometimes asked to), brothers giving devotions (expected to)... Some of that goes a bit far I think, or at least it is unknown to NMB folks. Just because somebody wants to go to a Menno church doesn't mean they want to become a preacher. It doesn't mean they want to be a bench warmer either.... I don't know how to explain it -> my tone of voice is not ugly in typing this btw, it is just kind of like "what?? - I didn't come here to preach". This is baked in with several Menno cultures apparently, and some not. I just tell my wife "Apparently Mennonites love speeches".

I was from a church where only a few people did anything, and the rest were bench warmers. I was used to doing all of these things, so it was no big deal, it is done on rotation in my current church. My biggest fear was being consigned to being a bench warmer. In many evangelical churches today, there is such an emphasis in young, right out of school types, the guy 20 years older than the pastor is likely to get sidelined, especially if he does not have a beard.

What I like about the culture is that everyone pitches in without complaining! Church clean ups, construction, maint and such was a problem, and you should have heard the complaints.

I was looking for what apparently shocked you. You must realize that the next preacher, if he is drawn by lot may well be any man in the congregation so it is perhaps better to start training them early.

J.M.

Yes, all the pitching in isn't an issue. I'll clean up all the church needs and serve others. What was somewhat of a "shock" (which can be good and bad) is that if you have something to say, it's sermon time. Devotions and sermons were foreign to me. Again, I don't mind serving.

[TeleBodyofChrist]

The biggest shock: People don't just come to church. Members are expected to participate in all aspects of the church itself. I know that sounds a bit weird to say. No probs helping church clean ups / construction / maint / and such, that's normal. Other stuff such as any member brother can give a message (and is sometimes asked to), brothers giving devotions (expected to)... Some of that goes a bit far I think, or at least it is unknown to NMB folks. Just because somebody wants to go to a Menno church doesn't mean they want to become a preacher. It doesn't mean they want to be a bench warmer either.... I don't know how to explain it -> my tone of voice is not ugly in typing this btw, it is just kind of like "what?? - I didn't come here to preach". This is baked in with several Menno cultures apparently, and some not. I just tell my wife "Apparently Mennonites love speeches".

It was a shock. What we were used to was people volunteering for things they were led to do utilizing their gifts. We were not used to being signed up for things with out being asked first. That was the biggest difference for us.

[Wade]

As far as standards go, I FULLY believe in conviction way way above standards.

Why don't you watch TV? Is it because your church said "no it's worldly" or do you really know that many of it's "programs" indoctrinate the audience into satanic ideologies?

Movies? Same thing.

Children's shows/ Disney? Same thing. So many contain the core teaching of Satanism.

I formed my own convictions. I have an idea but never read the standards at my church on media. Apparently, we are doing it.

Before I went to my church, I had no convictions about photography or of printing images of myself or of other people. (I did feel a certain amount of discomfort with "selfies", though.)

Despite not having any convictions, I chose to submit to this area anyway, and sought good spiritual counsel about how to approach things like photography being required on the job. I found joy in submitting to that.

Nowadays I do share the same conviction as my church, and see good spiritual fruit from abstaining from "selfies" and collecting pictures of people, living things, always taking photos when on trips, etc. That doesn't mean I think all Christians need to, but I think it's a good way for my specific congregation and church to live.

I think a lot of convictions will progress this way for people who become part of a plain community and plain church.

I agree with you Josh. Now consider a newcomer willing to submit with a wife who has countless pictures of her children... To a man these things are easy but not for most women- imo...

[Sudsy]

I agree with you Josh. Now consider a newcomer willing to submit with a wife who has countless pictures of her children... To a man these things are easy but not for most women- imo...

Still totally in the dark about the 'pictures' restriction. Curious - what scriptural support is used for this one ?

[Neto]

I agree with you Josh. Now consider a newcomer willing to submit with a wife who has countless pictures of her children... To a man these things are easy but not for most women- imo...

Still totally in the dark about the 'pictures' restriction. Curious - what scriptural support is used for this one ?

"Thou shalt not make graven images." (But not my interpretation of that. Also, I've seen lots of pictures taken by Old Order Amish, and it is not only scenery & such like, but people too, although it's mostly children. I think in many circles it may considered OK to take photos of children, perhaps because they are not yet members. Just a guess as to why.)

[Josh]

I agree with you Josh. Now consider a newcomer willing to submit with a wife who has countless pictures of her children... To a man these things are easy but not for most women- imo...

Still totally in the dark about the 'pictures' restriction. Curious - what scriptural support is used for this one ?

I'll give you one guess and then I'll explain.

I do not wish to get in another argument with you about church standards. My example was to how how my church has specific standards we don't believe are an absolute requirement for everyone to do, but are a good application of scripture for us.

I do want you to consider if the entire youth group posting selfies multiple times a day looks like the kingdom of heaven and what scriptural support there is for that.