Standards?

Christian ethics and theology with an Anabaptist perspective
Soloist
Posts: 5495
Joined: Sat Nov 12, 2016 4:49 pm
Affiliation: CM Seeker

Standards?

Post by Soloist »

rules,

1: No debating/arguing in this thread

2: State your view on the question.

3: List church affiliation or closest alignment.

4: Questions for clarifying positions are permitted.

In your view or your church view, is having standards wrong or right? at what point would you feel the standards are wrong?
0 x
Soloist, but I hate singing alone
Soloist, but my wife posts with me
Soloist, but I believe in community
Soloist, but I want God in the pilot seat
MaxPC
Posts: 9044
Joined: Sat Oct 22, 2016 9:09 pm
Location: Former full time RVers
Affiliation: PlainRomanCatholic
Contact:

Re: Standards?

Post by MaxPC »

Theological/discipleship standards?
Or
Lifestyle standards for example: all black vehicles, clothing, etc?
0 x
Max (Plain Catholic)
Mt 24:35
Proverbs 18:2 A fool does not delight in understanding but only in revealing his own mind.
1 Corinthians 3:19 For the wisdom of this world is folly with God
User avatar
Bootstrap
Posts: 14445
Joined: Thu Oct 20, 2016 9:59 am
Affiliation: Mennonite

Re: Standards?

Post by Bootstrap »

Soloist wrote:1: No debating/arguing in this thread
2: State your view on the question.
3: List church affiliation or closest alignment.
4: Questions for clarifying positions are permitted.

In your view or your church view, is having standards wrong or right? at what point would you feel the standards are wrong?
I'm a non-plain Mennonite attending a Presbyterian church.

Here's how I see it: You need standards, without them you will have chaos. Standards should emphasize and promote what is central to New Testament teaching, without attempting to enforce uniformity. To use a New Testament analogy, Jew and Greek should be able to live righteous lives under the right standards, they should not be designed to favor one over the other.

Obviously, that leaves room for discernment, and different groups will reach different conclusions. But this would be my approach.
0 x
Is it biblical? Is it Christlike? Is it loving? Is it true? How can I find out?
User avatar
Josh
Posts: 23826
Joined: Wed Oct 19, 2016 6:23 pm
Location: 1000' ASL
Affiliation: The church of God

Re: Standards?

Post by Josh »

Church of God in Christ, Mennonite (commonly known as Holdeman)

Our view of standards is that they should be a servant to help keep weaker brothers from going astray, and to help set good guidelines for young people. They are also a useful benchmark for convicting young people who are not yet converted of their need for a saviour to help them follow even the simplest obedience, for we believe it is not possible to consistently obey church standards without genuinely being born again.

We have a strong view that standards should not make someone be required to change their culture, so we have an open cultural view for mission type of churches. In North America, that means city mission outreaches, primarily. For someone joining an established (typically rural or outer suburban) church, that means the seeker will need to conform his or her culture to that of the group they are joining.

In overseas settings, we try to adapt standards to fit New Testament teaching but be relevant in a local cultural setting. For example, the colour black can have a very negative meaning in some places. In North America it is not so negative. So whereas congregations in North America often choose to have black veils, in Africa or Russia they might choose to have bright blue instead. What is important is that the congregation operates in submission one to another.

Another example is handling money and finances - what represents covetousness and greed in an indigenous central American village that converted en masse to our church is very, very different from what it is in North America. Possessions or cash might not be a temptation, but jockeying for status within the community very well could be.
0 x
Hats Off
Posts: 2532
Joined: Thu Feb 09, 2017 6:42 pm
Affiliation: Plain Menno OO

Re: Standards?

Post by Hats Off »

Member of an Old Order car church.

We believe and accept the Dordrecht Mennonite Confession of Faith. In Article 6, we confess that "neither baptism, nor the Lord's Super, nor church membership, nor any other outward ceremony can without faith, the new birth and the amendment of life make it possible for us to please God." We would add that standards or church rules are necessary just like baptism, the Lord's Supper, or church membership, but none of them can save us.

Church standards are beneficial in promoting teachings like non-resistance and non-conformity and can help in maintaining and showing unity. However, when church standards or ordnung replace faith at the centre of our church life, they lose their value. It is said that the Jewish leaders studied the Mosaic Law and then built a fence around the Law so that innocent people would not unknowingly transgress the law. Later the Pharisees built a fence around the fence around the fence around the law. Today, we can do that with standards to the point where we build a fence around the standards to protect the standards that were put in place to guide us through life.
0 x
Soloist
Posts: 5495
Joined: Sat Nov 12, 2016 4:49 pm
Affiliation: CM Seeker

Re: Standards?

Post by Soloist »

MaxPC wrote:Theological/discipleship standards?
Or
Lifestyle standards for example: all black vehicles, clothing, etc?
I'm focusing on lifestyle and theological. There are some verses that churches have formed standard interpretations on namely D/R would be one that comes to mind.
0 x
Soloist, but I hate singing alone
Soloist, but my wife posts with me
Soloist, but I believe in community
Soloist, but I want God in the pilot seat
User avatar
Josh
Posts: 23826
Joined: Wed Oct 19, 2016 6:23 pm
Location: 1000' ASL
Affiliation: The church of God

Re: Standards?

Post by Josh »

Soloist wrote:I'm focusing on lifestyle and theological. There are some verses that churches have formed standard interpretations on namely D/R would be one that comes to mind.
Well, everyone has some kind of standard around this - some accept polygamy, some expect nobody to get married (Shakers), and some are in between those two points.
0 x
MattY
Posts: 236
Joined: Tue May 02, 2017 5:36 pm
Location: Ohio
Affiliation: Beachy
Contact:

Re: Standards?

Post by MattY »

Soloist wrote:In your view or your church view, is having standards wrong or right? at what point would you feel the standards are wrong?
Member of a Beachy congregation. I'll try to give my church's view, which is maybe the overall Beachy view as well, and add my comments later.

I think the general Beachy view, or at least the view at my church, is that standards are applications of biblical principles. The principle is the foundation, and the application is the outworking of the principle. Principles do not change; applications may change. Standards, as applications of those principles, function as guardrails and guidelines that help keep members on the right path - especially weaker or younger members. So because of this role, they are right and even necessary. They are wrong if there is no longer any purpose for them, other than tradition, or, "It was good enough for grandpa, so it should be good enough for you."

Some - not all - may still offer two other justifications for standards, especially clothing standards: One, for separation from the world, so we look different; and two, for uniformity. The latter especially is not a very popular answer any more; it is probably more common to hear that we need "unity" not "uniformity", than to hear an actual defense of uniformity, although that still happens sometimes. At least that's my experience. As for the former (separation from the world), it is being emphasized that separation begins in the heart, so it is not necessarily a goal to look different, but that heart attitudes will affect what people's actions, what they do, what they wear, etc.

I agree with that last part, but I'm not quite on board with the justification for standards, especially such specific standards. It doesn't adequately explain for me why women must wear solid color dresses and not prints, or why hair may be parted in the middle but not on the side, or any number of other things, where a perfectly fine application is excluded and if someone is doing that, it becomes a problem. Here's my view: standards should be fairly general and not try to enforce uniformity, nor should they try to enforce an Amish view of separation from the world. Separation is in the heart; any person with Amish or conservative Mennonite dress can be worldly at heart, and someone who buys ready-made clothes in the store and can blend in with a crowd can be as faithful, sanctified, and un-worldly as any conservative Anabaptist. Standards are probably wrong when: (1) they are held for no reason other than tradition, (2) they exclude other believers who also apply the same biblical principles in their lives, making their outward conformity to a specific man-made rule a test of fellowship, rather than accepting them based on their already existing and fully biblical practice (for example, making our fellow sister in Christ buy new coverings with strings, when she wears maybe a veil, or a covering that would be fine if not for the lack of strings - that strikes me as being wrong), or (3) they place an undue burden on fellow believers to comply on outward matters that have no spiritual significance one way or another (Col. 2:20-23) - this is quite similar to the previous one. One could also suggest something like, when they interfere with our liberty in Christ, or when they become the basic norm for Christian living, instead of living by the Spirit.

One positive development in Beachy churches, in my view, is that the burden of proof is being increasingly placed on the old practice - to prove that it is indeed based on Scripture rather than tradition.
0 x
Almighty, most holy God
Faithful through the ages
Almighty, most holy Lord
Glorious, almighty God
Sudsy
Posts: 5859
Joined: Sat Feb 11, 2017 3:32 pm
Affiliation: .

Re: Standards?

Post by Sudsy »

Soloist wrote:rules,

1: No debating/arguing in this thread

2: State your view on the question.

3: List church affiliation or closest alignment.

4: Questions for clarifying positions are permitted.

In your view or your church view, is having standards wrong or right? at what point would you feel the standards are wrong?
Mennonite Brethren Canada

Having standards are not wrong but need not become a book of rules. We have a standard that to function in a leadership and worship team role one must be a baptised, born again believer. We allow women in leadership roles except for the lead and teaching pastor roles. Other standards have more to do with not causing strife and not openly arguing against the statement of faith and a few things like this. Nothing regarding what you are to wear or not wear or where you can go or not go. Standards in those areas, I believe, become rules rather than considerations and when they do, imo, they become group identifiers more than helpful means for spiritual growth. Separation from the world becomes separation from other groups of Christians in Christ's Church.
0 x
Pursuing a Kingdom life in the Spirit
Adam
Posts: 168
Joined: Fri Jan 06, 2017 10:35 pm
Location: Papua New Guinea
Affiliation: Kingdom Christian

Re: Standards?

Post by Adam »

I am an ordained Assemblies of God minister trending toward Conservative Anabaptist belief and practice.

I have never been in a church that has any standards, and I don't like the results that I have seen, both in myself and others. I find myself longing to be in a community that has agreed to follow standards as a practical outworking of the faith. I think such standards should be directly derived from Biblical principles. If people have trouble explaining the Biblical reason behind a standard, it is probably a cultural standard and I would question its usefulness in the church.
0 x
Post Reply