Southeastern Mennonite Conference

[Ernie]

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.

I don't recommend that people stay at churches where there is a 30-50% chance that their children or grandchildren won't be with nonconformed, nonresistant type church. But I would rather they go to such a church, then end up in a church where there is only a 1% or 5% chance that their posterity will be nonconformed, nonresistant Christians.

[wesleyb]

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?

I suppose so. But if they had chosen the non-conference path would there still be 838 moderately conservative Mennonites in VA/WV today? More? Less? I don't know, but my gut feeling is less.

[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?

I suppose so. But if they had chosen the non-conference path would there still be 838 moderately conservative Mennonites in VA/WV today? More? Less? I don't know, but my gut feeling is less.

Yeah. Maybe so.

[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?

I suppose so. But if they had chosen the non-conference path would there still be 838 moderately conservative Mennonites in VA/WV today? More? Less? I don't know, but my gut feeling is less.

So, is it then the case that a percentage of conservative Anabaptists remain such not because of personal conviction but because they are inside a social structure of some sort that incentivizes being part of the community? I.e. a family, local congregation, or church conference.

[RZehr]

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

I suppose so. But if they had chosen the non-conference path would there still be 838 moderately conservative Mennonites in VA/WV today? More? Less? I don't know, but my gut feeling is less.

So, is it then the case that a percentage of conservative Anabaptists remain such not because of personal conviction but because they are inside a social structure of some sort that incentivizes being part of the community? I.e. a family, local congregation, or church conference.

For certain, yes.

[Biblical Anabaptist]

My family was Virginia Conference going back many generations. My parents went with Southeastern in 1972 when that split off. I have one brother who is still there and has raised his family there.

I did a quick calculation and it looks like out my high school class and the ones immediately before and after about 30% are still in Southeastern, about 30% are in other Mennonite churches and 40% have left the Mennonites altogether. It would be interesting to know how this compares to other conservative Mennonites.

It would be interesting to know. Those numbers seem pretty high to me but I have no way of knowing how they compare to loss rates in other conferences.

According to Wikipedia, here are numbers for EPMC:

In 1969, the Eastern Pennsylvania Mennonite Church and Related Areas had 27 congregations with 1,181 church members; in 1995 it had 59 churches with 3,434 members.[3] In 2001 there were 4,206 members.[4] In 2010, it had 77 congregations with 5,333 members. In 2020 it had 95 congregations, 6,656 members, 27 Bishops, 179 Ministers and 113 Deacons. In 2019,the Church also had 84 schools, 300 teachers and 2,679 pupils.

Both Eastern and Pilgrim do a lot of going into an area where there are problems and starting churches for the disgruntled members.

[mike]

I suppose so. But if they had chosen the non-conference path would there still be 838 moderately conservative Mennonites in VA/WV today? More? Less? I don't know, but my gut feeling is less.

So, is it then the case that a percentage of conservative Anabaptists remain such not because of personal conviction but because they are inside a social structure of some sort that incentivizes being part of the community? I.e. a family, local congregation, or church conference.

For certain, yes.

I assume that is probably the case with almost any social group, with the exception of new or revolutionary movements, where 100% of the people in the movement are there because they chose to be there. But that doesn't last.

[Ernie]

I suppose so. But if they had chosen the non-conference path would there still be 838 moderately conservative Mennonites in VA/WV today? More? Less? I don't know, but my gut feeling is less.

So, is it then the case that a percentage of conservative Anabaptists remain such not because of personal conviction but because they are inside a social structure of some sort that incentivizes being part of the community? I.e. a family, local congregation, or church conference.

For certain, yes.

Yes! And that is why we, and many other stripes of Christians put a big emphasis on church attendance, being integrated into the church, etc. etc.

The story goes that a pastor once had a parishioner who was gradually moving away from God and the church. The pastor invited the man over to his backyard and got a campfire going. They talked about non-spiritual matters for a long time. During this time the pastor would take a log away from the fire and pull it to the edge of the ring where it would flicker for awhile and then begin to go out. Then the pastor would push it toward the fire where it would again ignite and burn brightly. After doing this for a couple hours, the man said, "Well pastor, I get your point. I'll be there every Sunday."

[barnhart]

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.

Is this a value you find in the teaching or example of Jesus and the apostles. There is a certain type of danger found raising goals and motivations not found in the scriptures even when they are good things.

[Ken]

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.

Location is as important or more so than a specific conference.

If you are located in a rural area without a lot of economic opportunity then the chances that your children and especially grandchildren will be around in 30-50 years is pretty slim regardless of theology.

I've seen in in my own extended family. I have relatives who have chosen to raise families in fairly remote rural areas for a long list of reasons that they might have thought were excellent and sound reasons at the time. None of their kids stuck around.