Anabaptist church planting: a proposal

[Ken]

But for the larger and more successful churches I see around here the us/them dichotomy is whether you are part of the community or not. Do your kids go to the same schools? Play on the same soccer teams? are you involved in local community issues? Work for the same employers? Do we cross paths in the local grocery, library, etc? Do you have the same Pacific Northwest "vibe" and values? Then yes, you are part of the "in" regardless of what your ethnic heritage is.

Ken,

Re-read what I said:

Ernie also made me aware of a premise in sociological research which is that most people prefer to associate with people who are exactly like them, "most" being about 97%. But about 3% of people crave new experiences and like to associate with people who are different than them.

Specifically, I said that "most people prefer to associate with people who are ... like them". In other words, yes, maybe they're at the same employer, or children go to the same employer, or they have similar PNW values.

Over time, a group of people who associate with other people similar to themselves will eventually form an ethnic group, assuming they have enough cohesion that their children end up marrying each other and forming families.

My only point was that I don't think non-immigrant America really divides all that much on ethnic lines anymore. This isn't 1910 Chicago where there was Greek Town, Little Italy, Polish Town, Serbian Town, etc. and churches divided along those same ethnic and language line.

You can call suburban America an "ethnicity" but it's really not. It is just the dominant culture for the area. And it will be different if you are in Frisco Texas, Cobb County Georgia, Orange County, CA, or suburban Boston.

Either way, a group of ethnic conservative Mennonites dropping into an suburban or urban area is going to be way on the outside, no matter what their ethnicity. And they can certainly work their way into the "inside" for that particular community but honestly, the sorts of things it takes to really break into a community kind of go against the grain of conservative Menno culture. So it is kind of a catch 22. You can plant a group of conservative Mennonites in some generic suburb and they can do their thing. But they aren't like to grow much unless they change who they are.

[Ernie]

I think I agree with everything you are saying here, Josh. What I am promoting is quite rare in the circles where I have been, but I think that we as Swiss/German/Dutch Anabaptists should be able to do at least a bit of 3% sort of church planting, rather than virtually none of it.

One reason I was attracted to the church group I'm in is that more than 3% of people end up being tract workers, missionaries, service unit house parents, and so on. It is certainly possible for Anabaptists to do this.

I spent the first 40 years of my life relating to "97% churches". The last 10 years I have related to many churches that want to be the 3% kind, but they almost always attract people from a wide variety of Swiss/German/Dutch Anabaptists settings. These disaffected folks swell the numbers, (which can give the allusion of church growth) but they create so much work for the church leaders that the church leaders don't really have much energy left for reaching outside of the church.

I think the phenomenon you ran into over the last 10 years is that many of the people who get attracted are actually 3%ers from other settings who like the idea of the diversity and so on, but once they move to, for example, a new conservative Anabaptist church upstart in a college town, they end up wanting to get settled back into their own ways.

The obvious thing to do is to keep the disaffected folks out and have an explicit policy goal not to have one ethnic group predominant, and to have frank conversations with people from long lineages of plain Anabaptists families that they form an ethnic group. (I have run into a number of people from Amish backgrounds who think they are from a "non-Mennonite background" because they eventually joined a less-conservative Mennonite church.)

They should, instead, be encouraged to go and plant new churches somewhere else, not to try to latch on to something that already exists and is diverse. In other words, it should be treated exactly how a mission is. Missions are not places where anyone is welcome to just move in and transfer their membership, and mission staff are explicitly chosen.

I couldn't agree more.

[Ernie]

Either way, a group of ethnic conservative Mennonites dropping into an suburban or urban area is going to be way on the outside, no matter what their ethnicity. And they can certainly work their way into the "inside" for that particular community but honestly, the sorts of things it takes to really break into a community kind of go against the grain of conservative Menno culture. So it is kind of a catch 22. You can plant a group of conservative Mennonites in some generic suburb and they can do their thing. But they aren't like to grow much unless they change who they are.

I agree. I'm curious what you think would need to be changed.

[Ken]

Either way, a group of ethnic conservative Mennonites dropping into an suburban or urban area is going to be way on the outside, no matter what their ethnicity. And they can certainly work their way into the "inside" for that particular community but honestly, the sorts of things it takes to really break into a community kind of go against the grain of conservative Menno culture. So it is kind of a catch 22. You can plant a group of conservative Mennonites in some generic suburb and they can do their thing. But they aren't like to grow much unless they change who they are.

I agree. I'm curious what you think would need to be changed.

It depends upon what the objective is. Conservative Mennonites have traditionally been an insular rural culture. These are the people I come from going back many generations.

If you want to simply plant new conservative Mennonite "colonies" in new suburban areas but keep all the ethnic trappings of the culture then you are going to be more like the Hasidic Jews who do that sort of thing in the exurbs around New York City. You'll have your same old insular and self-sufficient community, just in a suburban rather than rural setting. With separate schools, separate businesses, etc. And while there will be polite cordial interactions and business down with the outside community, you won't really be a part of it. And while you will get the occasional curious outsider dropping in and potentially wanting to join, they won't necessarily be doing so for the right reasons. I expect Hasidic Jewish communities get their own "seekers" as well who are looking to marry in, find a subservient wife, and so forth.

When I go back and visit the more conservative Menno areas where my roots are from and visit the churches where I still have extended family. It feels like it is really just a lot of ordinary folk who are there in that church more or less by default. It is where they grew up and what they know and are comfortable with. But they aren't obsessively doctrinaire and generally pretty relaxed. But the folks who actually seek out that sort of life from the outside are a different and much more obsessive sort. Who often seem drawn to the more rigid and disciplinarian aspects. And sometimes even a little unhinged. The focus isn't on being good Christians, but on strict traditional gender roles, patriarchal family structure, strict discipline of children, etc. The Christianity part is almost secondary.

On the other hand, if you want to build a new church somewhere and really be a part of a new community and grow with it. With your growth coming primarily from local people joining the church rather than other conservative Mennonites moving in. Then you are going to have to change who you are and you will wind up looking more like any other generic community church except with some remaining Anabaptist flavor. I don't think it is a coincidence that most urban Anabaptist churches are more along the MCUSA flavor. And a growing number don't even use Mennonite in their name.

I don't think there is a third option. That is why new groups like FOTW seem to mostly be recruiting out of existing Menno communities and not growing organically within their communities. How many local Bostonians, who don't have a Menno background attend Sattler College, for example? I'm sure there are probably a few, but that isn't where their growth is coming from.

[Neto]

Either way, a group of ethnic conservative Mennonites dropping into an suburban or urban area is going to be way on the outside, no matter what their ethnicity. And they can certainly work their way into the "inside" for that particular community but honestly, the sorts of things it takes to really break into a community kind of go against the grain of conservative Menno culture. So it is kind of a catch 22. You can plant a group of conservative Mennonites in some generic suburb and they can do their thing. But they aren't like to grow much unless they change who they are.

I agree. I'm curious what you think would need to be changed.

....
If you want to simply plant new conservative Mennonite "colonies" in new suburban areas but keep all the ethnic trappings of the culture then you are going to ... have your same old insular and self-sufficient community, just in a suburban rather than rural setting. With separate schools, separate businesses, etc. And while there will be polite cordial interactions and business down [done?] with the outside community, you won't really be a part of it. ....

.... But the folks who actually seek out that sort of life from the outside are a different and much more obsessive sort. Who often seem drawn to the more rigid and disciplinarian aspects. And sometimes even a little unhinged. The focus isn't on being good Christians, but on strict traditional gender roles, patriarchal family structure, strict discipline of children, etc. The Christianity part is almost secondary.

On the other hand, if you want to build a new church somewhere and really be a part of a new community and grow with it. With your growth coming primarily from local people joining the church rather than other conservative Mennonites moving in. Then you are going to have to change who you are and you will wind up looking more like any other generic community church except with some remaining Anabaptist flavor. I don't think it is a coincidence that most urban Anabaptist churches are more along the MCUSA flavor. And a growing number don't even use Mennonite in their name.
....

I think that Ken has touched on some of the main salient points here. It is perhaps much more difficult now than it was back in the development period of the 'early anabaptists', but looking really different can be a problem, but I also don't think it is unsurmountable. Every where you go, if you want to be real friends of people of a different culture, it takes time to "earn a hearing", to become trusted members of a community.

Ken also mentions the separate school. Now if you can go into a place, start a school, and manage to gain the trust of a few adventurous types who will send their children to your school, it just might work. But I think it would take a lot longer than if your own children go to the school where their children attend. But because this might be placing your children in harms way, this would very much depend on what type of community you were moving into. There must, however, be some sort of involvement in the community that goes beyond just doing business there. I could also, however, be "all wet". All of my training and experience was with a remote, insular society. And we were welcomed there, requested, actually, although not with the aim of them hearing the Gospel. Their motivation was to get both goods and services from a connection to the city. All sorts of goods, and medical treatment. To paraphrase the title of a book I got for my wife some years ago, "The Gospel comes with a Servant's Attitude".

[One more comment, then I'll shut up. If this 3% deal is anywhere near accurate, then I do not think that you can find a whole "congregation worth of people" who will want to get involved. I can think of lots of young people with whom I went through missionary training, and lots of those never left 'American soil'. There are also those who prepared, then God Himself seems to have laid out a different path for them. One of my great uncles was one who, as a young man, felt a strong pull to missionary service. He was never able to pursue that 'dream', but it was instilled in his children and grandchildren, and many of them were (and are) personally involved in missionary careers. Oh, I think I said I was going to shut up....]

[Ken]

I agree. I'm curious what you think would need to be changed.

....
If you want to simply plant new conservative Mennonite "colonies" in new suburban areas but keep all the ethnic trappings of the culture then you are going to ... have your same old insular and self-sufficient community, just in a suburban rather than rural setting. With separate schools, separate businesses, etc. And while there will be polite cordial interactions and business down [done?] with the outside community, you won't really be a part of it. ....

.... But the folks who actually seek out that sort of life from the outside are a different and much more obsessive sort. Who often seem drawn to the more rigid and disciplinarian aspects. And sometimes even a little unhinged. The focus isn't on being good Christians, but on strict traditional gender roles, patriarchal family structure, strict discipline of children, etc. The Christianity part is almost secondary.

On the other hand, if you want to build a new church somewhere and really be a part of a new community and grow with it. With your growth coming primarily from local people joining the church rather than other conservative Mennonites moving in. Then you are going to have to change who you are and you will wind up looking more like any other generic community church except with some remaining Anabaptist flavor. I don't think it is a coincidence that most urban Anabaptist churches are more along the MCUSA flavor. And a growing number don't even use Mennonite in their name.
....

I think that Ken has touched on some of the main salient points here. It is perhaps much more difficult now than it was back in the development period of the 'early anabaptists', but looking really different can be a problem, but I also don't think it is unsurmountable. Every where you go, if you want to be real friends of people of a different culture, it takes time to "earn a hearing", to become trusted members of a community.

Ken also mentions the separate school. Now if you can go into a place, start a school, and manage to gain the trust of a few adventurous types who will send their children to your school, it just might work. But I think it would take a lot longer than if your own children go to the school where their children attend. But because this might be placing your children in harms way, this would very much depend on what type of community you were moving into. There must, however, be some sort of involvement in the community that goes beyond just doing business there. I could also, however, be "all wet". All of my training and experience was with a remote, insular society. And we were welcomed there, requested, actually, although not with the aim of them hearing the Gospel. Their motivation was to get both goods and services from a connection to the city. All sorts of goods, and medical treatment. To paraphrase the title of a book I got for my wife some years ago, "The Gospel comes with a Servant's Attitude".

[One more comment, then I'll shut up. If this 3% deal is anywhere near accurate, then I do not think that you can find a whole "congregation worth of people" who will want to get involved. I can think of lots of young people with whom I went through missionary training, and lots of those never left 'American soil'. There are also those who prepared, then God Himself seems to have laid out a different path for them. One of my great uncles was one who, as a young man, felt a strong pull to missionary service. He was never able to pursue that 'dream', but it was instilled in his children and grandchildren, and many of them were (and are) personally involved in missionary careers. Oh, I think I said I was going to shut up....]

Honestly I think the entire premise of "church planting" is part of the problem. There is no part of this country that isn't already full of churches of every variety. Those local churches are the ones who should be taking the lead in evangelizing in their own communities. They are always going to be better at it since they are local and understand the local social culture. If conservative Mennonites want to move away from traditional rural Menno communities, they should find places that suit THEM and then move their because that is where they want to make their homes and be a part of the actual community, not because they want to plant churches. That's what the Amish do. You would never hear about Amish talking about church planting. At least not in the sense that others use the term. The do their research, find some new place where they want to move to, then do it. And then immediately set about improving it for future generations.

The whole language of church planting often has sort of a us/them superiority complex to it. We are the superior people who are coming into your world to impart our superior ideas, morals, and version of Christianity. You can't change the whole world. All you can do is maybe improve your own tiny corner of it. So pick the place you really want to be your homestead. Think in terms of GENERATIONS not 2 or 5 year mission terms. Then get down to the business of making your chosen home a better place however you define that (spiritually, socially, economically, environmentally etc.). And leave it a better place for your grandchildren and great grandchildren. That is how the original Menno settlers to PA and OH thought 2-3 centuries ago. And it is exactly what they did. No one was on a church planting mission to Bucks County PA in 1720 with the notion of returning back home to Switzerland 4 years later. They were building a new home for future generations. And I'm pretty sure they were full participants in their new communities in every way.

[ken_sylvania]

....
If you want to simply plant new conservative Mennonite "colonies" in new suburban areas but keep all the ethnic trappings of the culture then you are going to ... have your same old insular and self-sufficient community, just in a suburban rather than rural setting. With separate schools, separate businesses, etc. And while there will be polite cordial interactions and business down [done?] with the outside community, you won't really be a part of it. ....

.... But the folks who actually seek out that sort of life from the outside are a different and much more obsessive sort. Who often seem drawn to the more rigid and disciplinarian aspects. And sometimes even a little unhinged. The focus isn't on being good Christians, but on strict traditional gender roles, patriarchal family structure, strict discipline of children, etc. The Christianity part is almost secondary.

On the other hand, if you want to build a new church somewhere and really be a part of a new community and grow with it. With your growth coming primarily from local people joining the church rather than other conservative Mennonites moving in. Then you are going to have to change who you are and you will wind up looking more like any other generic community church except with some remaining Anabaptist flavor. I don't think it is a coincidence that most urban Anabaptist churches are more along the MCUSA flavor. And a growing number don't even use Mennonite in their name.
....

I think that Ken has touched on some of the main salient points here. It is perhaps much more difficult now than it was back in the development period of the 'early anabaptists', but looking really different can be a problem, but I also don't think it is unsurmountable. Every where you go, if you want to be real friends of people of a different culture, it takes time to "earn a hearing", to become trusted members of a community.

Ken also mentions the separate school. Now if you can go into a place, start a school, and manage to gain the trust of a few adventurous types who will send their children to your school, it just might work. But I think it would take a lot longer than if your own children go to the school where their children attend. But because this might be placing your children in harms way, this would very much depend on what type of community you were moving into. There must, however, be some sort of involvement in the community that goes beyond just doing business there. I could also, however, be "all wet". All of my training and experience was with a remote, insular society. And we were welcomed there, requested, actually, although not with the aim of them hearing the Gospel. Their motivation was to get both goods and services from a connection to the city. All sorts of goods, and medical treatment. To paraphrase the title of a book I got for my wife some years ago, "The Gospel comes with a Servant's Attitude".

[One more comment, then I'll shut up. If this 3% deal is anywhere near accurate, then I do not think that you can find a whole "congregation worth of people" who will want to get involved. I can think of lots of young people with whom I went through missionary training, and lots of those never left 'American soil'. There are also those who prepared, then God Himself seems to have laid out a different path for them. One of my great uncles was one who, as a young man, felt a strong pull to missionary service. He was never able to pursue that 'dream', but it was instilled in his children and grandchildren, and many of them were (and are) personally involved in missionary careers. Oh, I think I said I was going to shut up....]

Honestly I think the entire premise of "church planting" is part of the problem. There is no part of this country that isn't already full of churches of every variety. Those local churches are the ones who should be taking the lead in evangelizing in their own communities. They are always going to be better at it since they are local and understand the local social culture. If conservative Mennonites want to move away from traditional rural Menno communities, they should find places that suit THEM and then move their because that is where they want to make their homes and be a part of the actual community, not because they want to plant churches. That's what the Amish do. You would never hear about Amish talking about church planting. At least not in the sense that others use the term. The do their research, find some new place where they want to move to, then do it. And then immediately set about improving it for future generations.

The whole language of church planting often has sort of a us/them superiority complex to it. We are the superior people who are coming into your world to impart our superior ideas, morals, and version of Christianity. You can't change the whole world. All you can do is maybe improve your own tiny corner of it. So pick the place you really want to be your homestead. Think in terms of GENERATIONS not 2 or 5 year mission terms. Then get down to the business of making your chosen home a better place however you define that (spiritually, socially, economically, environmentally etc.). And leave it a better place for your grandchildren and great grandchildren. That is how the original Menno settlers to PA and OH thought 2-3 centuries ago. And it is exactly what they did. No one was on a church planting mission to Bucks County PA in 1720 with the notion of returning back home to Switzerland 4 years later. They were building a new home for future generations. And I'm pretty sure they were full participants in their new communities in every way.

Yep, that's certainly how the Great Commission reads, isn't it? And how Paul lived his life...

[Ken]

I think that Ken has touched on some of the main salient points here. It is perhaps much more difficult now than it was back in the development period of the 'early anabaptists', but looking really different can be a problem, but I also don't think it is unsurmountable. Every where you go, if you want to be real friends of people of a different culture, it takes time to "earn a hearing", to become trusted members of a community.

Ken also mentions the separate school. Now if you can go into a place, start a school, and manage to gain the trust of a few adventurous types who will send their children to your school, it just might work. But I think it would take a lot longer than if your own children go to the school where their children attend. But because this might be placing your children in harms way, this would very much depend on what type of community you were moving into. There must, however, be some sort of involvement in the community that goes beyond just doing business there. I could also, however, be "all wet". All of my training and experience was with a remote, insular society. And we were welcomed there, requested, actually, although not with the aim of them hearing the Gospel. Their motivation was to get both goods and services from a connection to the city. All sorts of goods, and medical treatment. To paraphrase the title of a book I got for my wife some years ago, "The Gospel comes with a Servant's Attitude".

[One more comment, then I'll shut up. If this 3% deal is anywhere near accurate, then I do not think that you can find a whole "congregation worth of people" who will want to get involved. I can think of lots of young people with whom I went through missionary training, and lots of those never left 'American soil'. There are also those who prepared, then God Himself seems to have laid out a different path for them. One of my great uncles was one who, as a young man, felt a strong pull to missionary service. He was never able to pursue that 'dream', but it was instilled in his children and grandchildren, and many of them were (and are) personally involved in missionary careers. Oh, I think I said I was going to shut up....]

Honestly I think the entire premise of "church planting" is part of the problem. There is no part of this country that isn't already full of churches of every variety. Those local churches are the ones who should be taking the lead in evangelizing in their own communities. They are always going to be better at it since they are local and understand the local social culture. If conservative Mennonites want to move away from traditional rural Menno communities, they should find places that suit THEM and then move their because that is where they want to make their homes and be a part of the actual community, not because they want to plant churches. That's what the Amish do. You would never hear about Amish talking about church planting. At least not in the sense that others use the term. The do their research, find some new place where they want to move to, then do it. And then immediately set about improving it for future generations.

The whole language of church planting often has sort of a us/them superiority complex to it. We are the superior people who are coming into your world to impart our superior ideas, morals, and version of Christianity. You can't change the whole world. All you can do is maybe improve your own tiny corner of it. So pick the place you really want to be your homestead. Think in terms of GENERATIONS not 2 or 5 year mission terms. Then get down to the business of making your chosen home a better place however you define that (spiritually, socially, economically, environmentally etc.). And leave it a better place for your grandchildren and great grandchildren. That is how the original Menno settlers to PA and OH thought 2-3 centuries ago. And it is exactly what they did. No one was on a church planting mission to Bucks County PA in 1720 with the notion of returning back home to Switzerland 4 years later. They were building a new home for future generations. And I'm pretty sure they were full participants in their new communities in every way.

Yep, that's certainly how the Great Commission reads, isn't it? And how Paul lived his life...

Paul was living in a world where Christianity did not exist outside of the few places that he and a few others had visited.

We don't live in that world anymore. If you can't find room for improvement in your own community I would suggest you aren't trying hard enough. And if you want to move elsewhere, do it thoughtfully and fully invest in wherever you chose to move thinking forward to future generations. Make it your home.

Look around the world to places like Guatemala, Brazil, Nigeria, etc. The churches that are growing like wildfire are the local ones lead by local people not Mennonite missionaries or any other kind of missionary. Mennonite missionaries are not even rounding error. In fact, the only kinds of Mennonites who have actually made a dent in Latin America are those who have chosen to actually make it their homes with no thought of ever moving back to where they came from. I don't necessarily agree with everything about the various Mennonite communities scattered across Latin America from Mexico to Paraguay. But I respect that they are actually building a world for future generations and fully invested in building actual communities.

[Josh]

Ken,

Have you ever been part of a conservative Anabaptist church or church plant in an urban area or in a mission at all?

If not, please refrain from offering commentary on this topic.

[Josh]

If you want to simply plant new conservative Mennonite "colonies" in new suburban areas but keep all the ethnic trappings of the culture then you are going to be more like the Hasidic Jews who do that sort of thing in the exurbs around New York City. You'll have your same old insular and self-sufficient community, just in a suburban rather than rural setting. With separate schools, separate businesses, etc. And while there will be polite cordial interactions and business down with the outside community, you won't really be a part of it. And while you will get the occasional curious outsider dropping in and potentially wanting to join, they won't necessarily be doing so for the right reasons.

CAs have about zero interest in suburban life and only end up in suburbs when their previously rural communities get encroached on by cities. An example is the VA Beach community.

A small subset of CAs would locate in cities (basically Apostolic Christians - Nazarean) and some of them are essentially suburban now. This is not the norm; the majority of them are still rural.

CAs who want to do domestic missions usually are interested in cities. Examples are NYC, where the Mennonite and AC presence is in Bronx, Harlem, and Brooklyn; York, PA, where they picked a block of rowhouses; the new communities in Allentown PA and Detroit MI. CA domestic missions seem to focus on decaying, high-crime, urban high density areas.

I expect Hasidic Jewish communities get their own "seekers" as well who are looking to marry in, find a subservient wife, and so forth.

I think that’s a really cynical and unfair view of Jewish converts and doesn’t match the motivations of any of the converts I’ve known.

When I go back and visit the more conservative Menno areas where my roots are from and visit the churches where I still have extended family. It feels like it is really just a lot of ordinary folk who are there in that church more or less by default. It is where they grew up and what they know and are comfortable with. But they aren't obsessively doctrinaire and generally pretty relaxed. But the folks who actually seek out that sort of life from the outside are a different and much more obsessive sort. Who often seem drawn to the more rigid and disciplinarian aspects. And sometimes even a little unhinged. The focus isn't on being good Christians, but on strict traditional gender roles, patriarchal family structure, strict discipline of children, etc. The Christianity part is almost secondary.

My experience with RNoC churches (which generally aren’t CA so are off topic to this discussion) is that guests and outsiders there are like people in any evangelical church. My local affiliate seemed to have a lot of homeschoolers or former homeschoolers. I would not describe those people as being particularly into strict discipline of children or strict traditional gender roles. The Christianity part was definitely not secondary either.

On the other hand, if you want to build a new church somewhere and really be a part of a new community and grow with it. With your growth coming primarily from local people joining the church rather than other conservative Mennonites moving in. Then you are going to have to change who you are and you will wind up looking more like any other generic community church except with some remaining Anabaptist flavor. I don't think it is a coincidence that most urban Anabaptist churches are more along the MCUSA flavor. And a growing number don't even use Mennonite in their name.

CAs continue to be one of the fastest growing religious groups there is, whereas evangelicalism is on decline, as is the megachurch model and the mainline Protestant model.

For an example of rapid growth mostly from outsiders, Oneness Pentecostals are doing this (including where I live). They have a strict lifestyle, strict doctrine, and don’t really make any accomodations or changes for seekers. Yet they have been successful where I live in recruiting a large fraction of the middle school and high school. Most of these people are from unchurched backgrounds.

Ken, I think you may have a vast amount of confusion in your mind about what CAs attain to versus whatever type of suburban upper-middle-class lifestyle you think most people or Americans strive for or something. Simply put, most CAs are not interested in that at all and consider it an impediment to mission. I myself certainly do. When distributing tracts, I quickly gained an instinct to simply walk past anyone who seems upper middle class, suburban, etc as my time is better spent with people who would accept gospel tracts and want to discuss them.