MennoNet.com

MaxPC wrote:

Judas Maccabeus wrote:

MaxPC wrote:I see an interesting connection between ourselves and other plain groups with the rejection of certain mass media and other tech that emerged approximately 120-150 years ago. Mass media, consumerism and mass production tech has been key in proliferating secularist ideologies. Our group emerged with its values in Great Britain and spread to "the colonies" eventually. Interesting to me is the same "plain" movement occurred in several different faith groups at about the same time.

I think you will find it right next to the Unicorns, Loch Ness Monster and Bigfoot. Never actually seen, but there are vague legends of it's existence.

J.M.

I can't decide if you're trying to be funny or if you're deliberately being hostile, JM.

I am just making the point that this has been written about, but no firm proof of it's existence has ever been presented. Just like all of the above.

J.M.

ohio jones wrote:

MaxPC wrote:

ohio jones wrote: Seems rather ironic that someone who takes such great offense at off-topic responses in one's own threads has such little conscience about contributing to the same thing in other threads. I won't speculate about motives, but responses, if any, might be better directed to the BT thread.

The Bible tells us to discern the spirits, OJ. I'm not going to derail a thread by giving a response based on incorrect assumptions. That's why I ask. Shouldn't you have set the example by posting in the BT thread?

I'm generally the one who derails the thread, not the one who complains about it.

But in this case I admit to being slightly miffed that a thread that is nominally about my Conference's conference devolves, like so many others, to discussing whether Plain Catholics exist. Regardless, you're welcome to show up in person and settle that question beyond any reasonable doubt for those of us who are there. Please wear your best suspenders.

Suspenders? In the CMC? They don't generally wear those in my conference, which is regarded as more conservative then the CMC (Or Rosedale connection?)

J.M.

Well...I can think of at least a few of us suspenderized CMCers - although it generally was by choice not dictated by church standard.

If you are here find me and say hello. I'm in orange flip flops and capri looking pants (courtesy of the rain).

I just read this in the Mennonite Weekly Review and then stumbled upon this thread. Any thoughts from anyone that was at the conference?

http://mennoworld.org/2017/08/07/news/c ... r-apology/

Well, yes, I have lots of thoughts on this, maybe a commodity somewhat devalued due to a sort of inflation that comes through excess supply and availability, but I'm waiting for a certain architect of some renown to weigh in so I can see what happens to him before betraying my position to the powers that be. On a perhaps unrelated topic, or perhaps not unrelated, OJ with breakfast is great. (We shall see if a thinly veiled attempt to provoke the reticent to loquacity will be met with success or bitter failure. Though it must be conceded that being on the fringes of the denomination in both geography and importance may provide a bit of safety not available to those who choose to make their abode near the center of power and have acquired a respectable reputation perhaps not attained by this member of the great unwashed.)

Not so much reticence as recovering from having recent breakfasts in a geographical location far from the center of power where there is an excess supply of ugali and a deficit of mzungus, but I'll draft a brief response.

For those wishing to form their own opinions, here are the video links:
Historical Perspective on Women's Roles
A Biblical Case for Complementarianism
Panel Discussion

I found the first two sessions to be well researched and solidly presented. The panel discussion was less satisfying, though perhaps some of that is inherent in the format, and the selection of panelists was rather skewed. The closing statements (the video inexplicably omits the response from the women panelists) seemed almost like an Amish-in-Israel-y attempt at religiopolitical correctness.

Stating on one hand that there is "no change in position" and on the other hand confessing sin and asking forgiveness seems a bit conflicted to me. Appealing to biblicism over tradition sounds good, but I wonder what the practical effect will be. I suspect there will be some testing of the boundaries.

ohio jones wrote:Not so much reticence as recovering from having recent breakfasts in a geographical location far from the center of power where there is an excess supply of ugali and a deficit of mzungus, but I'll draft a brief response.

For those wishing to form their own opinions, here are the video links:
Historical Perspective on Women's Roles
A Biblical Case for Complementarianism
Panel Discussion

I found the first two sessions to be well researched and solidly presented. The panel discussion was less satisfying, though perhaps some of that is inherent in the format, and the selection of panelists was rather skewed. The closing statements (the video inexplicably omits the response from the women panelists) seemed almost like an Amish-in-Israel-y attempt at religiopolitical correctness.

Stating on one hand that there is "no change in position" and on the other hand confessing sin and asking forgiveness seems a bit conflicted to me. Appealing to biblicism over tradition sounds good, but I wonder what the practical effect will be. I suspect there will be some testing of the boundaries.

This reminds me of the efforts in Catholic World regarding women's roles in the Church. Back in the 1980s our Bishops around the world held "listening" sessions in which women attended and shared their thoughts on a number of topics including the possibility of a female priesthood. Ultimately, the majority of women preferred the Biblical understanding of women and their complementarity to men's roles... different yet equal. Pope John Paul II maintained the Biblical definitions of men and women; further he emphasized that only men can be priests based upon that Biblical definition (women cannot preach/teach in churches); and duly recognized the heroic efforts of women through the centuries in bringing the Good News of Christ to others.

Periodically these things need to be re-examined to reinforce and clarify Biblical teachings to a new generation.

HK, Gene, OJ, Max .. alrighty, then.
what more could a Saturday morning offer up for reading.

I woud be interested to hear anyone's comments on Dr Lisa Weaver Swartz's seminar (which she gave to the high school juniors, seniors, and college & career aged track on Friday afternoon), particular her remarks about the need for slightly more LGBT inclusion and the need for women in leadership positions in order for the CMC to be able to retain young people.

I have been trying to get a recording of her session but have been unable to find one here http://cmcrosedale.org/media/video-links/; as far as I know, the session was not recorded.