Southeastern Mennonite Conference

[mike]

For some reason, over time, Southeastern has not been able to gain many more members than they lose.
In 1981, they had 732 members.
1996 =770

According to that, they actually lost membership between 1996 and 2010.

In the late 90's the conference divided geographically in an effort to pursue local leadership. The congregations in Georgia and South Carolina formed a sister conference, South Atlantic. As far as I know it was amicable, I was a member of one of the Georgia congregations at the time.

Oh, OK. That's good to know. Looks like that accounted for 4 congregations with 255 members, in 2010.

[silentreader]

For some reason, over time, Southeastern has not been able to gain many more members than they lose.
In 1981, they had 732 members.
1996 =770

According to that, they actually lost membership between 1996 and 2010.

In the late 90's the conference divided geographically in an effort to pursue local leadership. The congregations in Georgia and South Carolina formed a sister conference, South Atlantic. As far as I know it was amicable, I was a member of one of the Georgia congregations at the time.

Curious if you attended HBS in maybe 1996?

[barnhart]

According to that, they actually lost membership between 1996 and 2010.

In the late 90's the conference divided geographically in an effort to pursue local leadership. The congregations in Georgia and South Carolina formed a sister conference, South Atlantic. As far as I know it was amicable, I was a member of one of the Georgia congregations at the time.

Curious if you attended HBS in maybe 1996?

No. 1992 or 93.

[mike]

According to that, they actually lost membership between 1996 and 2010.

In the late 90's the conference divided geographically in an effort to pursue local leadership. The congregations in Georgia and South Carolina formed a sister conference, South Atlantic. As far as I know it was amicable, I was a member of one of the Georgia congregations at the time.

Oh, OK. That's good to know. Looks like that accounted for 4 congregations with 255 members, in 2010.

According to the SAMC website, they now have 9 congregations.

South Atlantic Mennonite Conference Churches
Barnwell Mennonite Church - Barnwell, South Carolina
Bethel Mennonite Church - Vidette, Georgia
Burkeland Mennonite Church- Waynesboro, Georgia
Christ Hope Mennonite Church - Miami, Florida
Edisto Mennonite Church - Hunters Chapel, South Carolina
Hephzibah Mennonite Church - Hephzibah, Georgia
Lighthouse Mennonite Church - Monticello, Georgia
Iglesia Menonita Seguidores de Cristo - Añasco, Puerto Rico
Iglesia Menonita Fuente de Vida - Barceloneta, Puerto Rico

[mike]

So if I understand correctly, what we're looking at is a conservative Mennonite conference established in the early 70s that today is perhaps moderately larger in size than it was 60 years ago accounting for its fragmentation into two regional conferences.

It's interesting considering the common view in conference circles that congregations and their members are somehow safer/better off being part of larger networks rather than operating independently. Going by wesleyb's numbers, in what way does a conference losing 30% of its members to other Mennonite churches and 40% of its members to non-Mennonite churches (or possibly even to the non-religious category) represent safety/stability?

[Ernie]

So if I understand correctly, what we're looking at is a conservative Mennonite conference established in the early 70s that today is perhaps moderately larger in size than it was 60 years ago accounting for its fragmentation into two regional conferences.

It's interesting considering the common view in conference circles that congregations and their members are somehow safer/better off being part of larger networks rather than operating independently. Going by wesleyb's numbers, in what way does a conference losing 30% of its members to other Mennonite churches and 40% of its members to non-Mennonite churches (or possibly even to the non-religious category) represent safety/stability?

Some segments of Anabaptists do better at retaining members than others. Moderate-conservative Anabaptists have historically had a hard time getting their children to believe and practice the same things they do. Any growth in their churches typically comes from more conservative folks joining the church. I think this is true regardless of whether a congregation is "unaffiliated" or part of a larger network.

If there is anything to be said for networks among moderate-conservatives, I think a congregation has less of a chance of dying out, if it is part of a larger network.

[mike]

So if I understand correctly, what we're looking at is a conservative Mennonite conference established in the early 70s that today is perhaps moderately larger in size than it was 60 years ago accounting for its fragmentation into two regional conferences.

It's interesting considering the common view in conference circles that congregations and their members are somehow safer/better off being part of larger networks rather than operating independently. Going by wesleyb's numbers, in what way does a conference losing 30% of its members to other Mennonite churches and 40% of its members to non-Mennonite churches (or possibly even to the non-religious category) represent safety/stability?

Some segments of Anabaptists do better at retaining members than others. Moderate-conservative Anabaptists have historically had a hard time getting their children to believe and practice the same things they do. Any growth in their churches typically comes from more conservative folks joining the church. I think this is true regardless of whether a congregation is "unaffiliated" or part of a larger network.

If there is anything to be said for networks among moderate-conservatives, I think a congregation has less of a chance of dying out, if it is part of a larger network.

Yes, it is pretty certain there will be a church there 30 years from now, but if there's a 30-50% chance your children or grandchildren won't be there, what kind of appeal does that have to someone looking for a solid place to land?

I ask this not really with the idea that this should be one of the primary goals in selecting a church. I ask it because it is one of the things that conservatives hold in high regard - the idea of generation after generation being in the same church tradition.

[wesleyb]

So if I understand correctly, what we're looking at is a conservative Mennonite conference established in the early 70s that today is perhaps moderately larger in size than it was 60 years ago accounting for its fragmentation into two regional conferences.

It's interesting considering the common view in conference circles that congregations and their members are somehow safer/better off being part of larger networks rather than operating independently. Going by wesleyb's numbers, in what way does a conference losing 30% of its members to other Mennonite churches and 40% of its members to non-Mennonite churches (or possibly even to the non-religious category) represent safety/stability?

Some segments of Anabaptists do better at retaining members than others. Moderate-conservative Anabaptists have historically had a hard time getting their children to believe and practice the same things they do. Any growth in their churches typically comes from more conservative folks joining the church. I think this is true regardless of whether a congregation is "unaffiliated" or part of a larger network.

If there is anything to be said for networks among moderate-conservatives, I think a congregation has less of a chance of dying out, if it is part of a larger network.

Yes, it is pretty certain there will be a church there 30 years from now, but if there's a 30-50% chance your children or grandchildren won't be there, what kind of appeal does that have to someone looking for a solid place to land?

I ask this not really with the idea that this should be one of the primary goals in selecting a church. I ask it because it is one of the things that conservatives hold in high regard - the idea of generation after generation being in the same church tradition.

It's interesting to speculate what would have happened if those original churches that withdrew from VA Conf. would have remained unaffiliated. My guess, assuming they all remained active today, is that they would be spread on a pretty wide spectrum from ultra or intermediate-conservative to mainstream Mennonite or non-Mennonite.

One thing the conference did (and still does) was keep things mixed up somewhat. There was always the awareness within the conference of which congregations were more "liberal" or "conservative" and members would move between congregations to find one that was nearer to their comfort level. But occasionally the conference (or district) would reassign ministers or bishops, I think partly to keep those differences to a minimum. Without that mixing, and with a lot of the churches being in a small geographic area, I think like-minded people would have grouped together and each church would have gone a different direction.

[mike]

It's interesting to speculate what would have happened if those original churches that withdrew from VA Conf. would have remained unaffiliated. My guess, assuming they all remained active today, is that they would be spread on a pretty wide spectrum from ultra or intermediate-conservative to mainstream Mennonite or non-Mennonite.

Essentially, isn't that what happened anyway if you follow individual members, not church congregations?

[Neto]

So if I understand correctly, what we're looking at is a conservative Mennonite conference established in the early 70s that today is perhaps moderately larger in size than it was 60 years ago accounting for its fragmentation into two regional conferences.

It's interesting considering the common view in conference circles that congregations and their members are somehow safer/better off being part of larger networks rather than operating independently. Going by wesleyb's numbers, in what way does a conference losing 30% of its members to other Mennonite churches and 40% of its members to non-Mennonite churches (or possibly even to the non-religious category) represent safety/stability?

People here would not consider the MB conference to be "conservative" (the word means something completely different in the MB context anyway), but what I noticed already back in my HS days, was that there was less "conference identity" than there had been in earlier years. I noticed this particularly when the family that moved from one area to another was not from MB background. So I think that extended family has perhaps an out-sized role in this. (That is, the lack of extended family members who live in more distant areas being in the same conference.) As far as MB background families leaving for a different Mennonite conference, I think that the historical differences (and sometimes the "bad blood" between the different groups) fades over time. I also suspect that people from smaller congregations, who then depend more on fellowship with members from other conference congregations - They will be more likely to stay, as long as those fellowship experiences have been positive. Member of larger congregations are, it seems to me, more likely to identify with their pastor, than with the conference. I have no idea how much "back & forth" there is between congregations of the same conference in the East (i.e., East of the Mississippi), and that would affect it as well, I think, especially for young people who had close relationships with youth from other congregations through conference youth retreats, camping programs, and youth leadership conferences. I don't even know if you all have had that sort of thing at all.