Surnames and Sectarianism

[Ernie]

This is a thread to discuss a question that comes up often...

Should Christians be known or identified by anything other than "Christian"?
Isn't calling one's self Mennonite or Baptist or Salvation Army the same as saying I am of Apollos, I am of Cephas, or I am of Christ?

Some instruct their adherents to just call themselves "Christian" and refuse to give any other explanation. Then when someone says, "I am a Christian also, but I am not like you. How are you different?", the adherents should respond with, "Christians believe/practice ________________, so we don't have any name to give ourselves other than Christian." Some take this so far as to not even give their local church or group a name. They just say, "We are the church at ________." The idea is that people want to know about the particulars, and we should not oblige their curiosity, and let them go on their way unchallenged. Rather we should make them wrestle with what it means to be a Christian.

Others have no problem with denominational names and think of them as surnames. They believe it helps give adherents and inquirers some idea of the faith traditions that have influenced them to become what they have become, in the same way that a surname helps us understand something of a person's region and lineage. These folks think it is only polite to oblige people's curiosity, and 'so what' if a person leaves the conversation without being provoked to wrestle with anything further.

I see truth in both of these concepts. I also notice that people can be proud about the non-denominationalism and people can be proud about their heritage. Both are very unfortunate as a major purpose of Christianity is to get us to humble ourselves before God, rather than be proud. I think God wants us to appreciate our heritage but not be proud of it.

In this thread you are welcome to make arguments for one concept or the other, suggest a way to embrace the truth of both concepts, or propose a third way / different view.

[Ken]

The discussion in the recent thread "Can Anabaptism be Catholic and vice versa?" suggests that your ecumenical "We are just Christians" approach isn't going to fly with much of anyone.

[barnhart]

Maybe I haven't seen it done correctly but groups that start from the first premise (only one faith) seem less likely to see other groups as legitimate believers.

Years ago there were some in our church who wanted to take "Mennonite" out of the church name over concern of sectarianism. I was not in favor because sectarian names reveal doctrine. If you are Sabbatarian or Reform or Apostolic or Anabaptist, I think it's good to be clear about it.

[Grace]

I have found the best way to identify myself, first as a Christian and follower of Jesus. Secondly, as being part of a Mennonite Fellowship.

[Josh]

Many Mennonite churches have decided to rename themselves from "Abctown Mennonite Church" to "Abctown Christian Fellowship" or something similar.

We can judge the fruit of such churches. Most of them have started on a slide to worldliness.

In my own denomination, there was teaching over 100 years ago that we should just call ourselves "Christian" and call the churches "a church of God", like is found in the New Testament. However, there were many other churches calling themselves a "church of God" who did not follow biblical doctrines and teachings; in particular, some did not even recognise that Jesus Christ is God, and persist to this day in not doing so. So they renamed to "Church of God in Christ".

People outside of our church insisted on continuing to call us "Mennonites", and there was confusion when another church called itself "Church of God in Christ". So eventually, they relented and called themselves "Church of God in Christ, Mennonite".

I feel like places that try to sneakily say "they are just Christians" are almost trying to hide something. The simply fact is that a plain or Anabaptist Christian church is fundamentally different from 99.7% of the other Christian churches someone might encounter. It's okay to acknowledge this fact on the church sign.

[HondurasKeiser]

Maybe I haven't seen it done correctly but groups that start from the first premise (only one faith) seem less likely to see other groups as legitimate believers.

Years ago there were some in our church who wanted to take "Mennonite" out of the church name over concern of sectarianism. I was not in favor because sectarian names reveal doctrine. If you are Sabbatarian or Reform or Apostolic or Anabaptist, I think it's good to be clear about it.

Agreed. I’ve also noticed that churches that want to remove Mennonite or Brethren from their names often do so because they want to leave behind certain Mennonite teachings on nonresistance and simple living. They’re going mainstream evangelical in their culture and the Mennonite name is an embarrassment to them.

[Ernie]

Maybe I haven't seen it done correctly but groups that start from the first premise (only one faith) seem less likely to see other groups as legitimate believers.

Years ago there were some in our church who wanted to take "Mennonite" out of the church name over concern of sectarianism. I was not in favor because sectarian names reveal doctrine. If you are Sabbatarian or Reform or Apostolic or Anabaptist, I think it's good to be clear about it.

Agreed. I’ve also noticed that churches that want to remove Mennonite or Brethren from their names often do so because they want to leave behind certain Mennonite teachings on nonresistance and simple living. They’re going mainstream evangelical in their culture and the Mennonite name is an embarrassment to them.

But what if the issue is not embarrassment with the name, nor wanting to leave behind certain Mennonite teachings on nonresistance and simple living, but rather wanting to take Paul seriously about giving ourselves sectarian names?

What if the issue is wanting to promote unity rather than separations? Our church did not use a surname when we started because we had people from Mennonite, Amish-Mennonite, Brethren, Catholic, Independent Baptist, Charity, and Assemblies of God churches. Our church practices drew from all of these backgrounds. No one name would have described all of us, except for some generic name like Christian Fellowship or Followers of Jesus Church.

[Ken]

Maybe I haven't seen it done correctly but groups that start from the first premise (only one faith) seem less likely to see other groups as legitimate believers.

Years ago there were some in our church who wanted to take "Mennonite" out of the church name over concern of sectarianism. I was not in favor because sectarian names reveal doctrine. If you are Sabbatarian or Reform or Apostolic or Anabaptist, I think it's good to be clear about it.

Agreed. I’ve also noticed that churches that want to remove Mennonite or Brethren from their names often do so because they want to leave behind certain Mennonite teachings on nonresistance and simple living. They’re going mainstream evangelical in their culture and the Mennonite name is an embarrassment to them.

But what if the issue is not embarrassment with the name, nor wanting to leave behind certain Mennonite teachings on nonresistance and simple living, but rather wanting to take Paul seriously about giving ourselves sectarian names?

What if the issue is wanting to promote unity rather than separations? Our church did not use a surname when we started because we had people from Mennonite, Amish-Mennonite, Brethren, Catholic, Independent Baptist, Charity, and Assemblies of God churches. Our church practices drew from all of these backgrounds. No one name would have described all of us, except for some generic name like Christian Fellowship or Followers of Jesus Church.

In practice it is probably a little of both.

[Neto]

Maybe I haven't seen it done correctly but groups that start from the first premise (only one faith) seem less likely to see other groups as legitimate believers.

Years ago there were some in our church who wanted to take "Mennonite" out of the church name over concern of sectarianism. I was not in favor because sectarian names reveal doctrine. If you are Sabbatarian or Reform or Apostolic or Anabaptist, I think it's good to be clear about it.

Agreed. I’ve also noticed that churches that want to remove Mennonite or Brethren from their names often do so because they want to leave behind certain Mennonite teachings on nonresistance and simple living. They’re going mainstream evangelical in their culture and the Mennonite name is an embarrassment to them.

I grew up in an MB congregation that changed from a congregation of almost totally ethnic derivation into one where it was approaching half & half. Already from before I was born there were two families I can think of right off that were inter-ethnic, one of my parent's generation that was Plautdietsch & Cherokee, and one of my grandparent's generation that was Plautdietsch & 'American'. Then there were other families that were totally non-Plautdietsch who had come into the congregation either before my earliest childhood memories (Mexican-American) and during my childhood, another that were all Cherokee.

Using that as the setting for my real comment here - Later, when there was a good deal of discussion about taking "Mennonite Brethren" out of the name, it was the ethnic members who were pushing it. It was, in fact, voted down by a large majority made up of perhaps only a few of the ethnic members who joined with almost all (possibly all) of the non-ethnic members, to keep Mennonite Brethren in the name.

There was a couple who started coming (as unbelievers) around the time I was in JR High or HS. She was a barmaid, and he was employed as a flight manager at the airport in Tulsa. They said that they were on the verge of divorce, when one Sunday they said to one another "Let's go see if those Mennonites will let us in the door." They not only got saved, held onto their marriage, and became active church members, but around the time I was a Junior in HS they left their jobs and moved their family to Omaha, where he studied for the ministry, in which service they served until his death. I think that part of the reason they decided to "try the Mennonites" was because of the perceived strangeness of it.

[Josh]

But what if the issue is not embarrassment with the name, nor wanting to leave behind certain Mennonite teachings on nonresistance and simple living, but rather wanting to take Paul seriously about giving ourselves sectarian names?

In that case. Why does your church need a name at all?

Amish churches don’t really have names. They just get called by a road name or a town name. Eg I used to live in what was the “Market Ave East” district.

Holdemans also tried that. Older congregations (like mine) are simply called “Town Congregation”. Everyone else refers to us as the Mennonite church.

Newer ones often have some name like “Cedar Crest Church”, which is even less descriptive. (Mennonites refer to that church as “Faunsdale”, the name of the nearest town. Non-Mennonites refer to is as “the Holdeman church near Demopolis” or “the Mennonite church near Demopolis”.)

What if the issue is wanting to promote unity rather than separations? Our church did not use a surname when we started because we had people from Mennonite, Amish-Mennonite, Brethren, Catholic, Independent Baptist, Charity, and Assemblies of God churches. Our church practices drew from all of these backgrounds. No one name would have described all of us, except for some generic name like Christian Fellowship or Followers of Jesus Church.

Such “generic names” are indeed indicative of denominational choices, though. It seems better to simply be upfront about what you are.

Overall, wanting to get rid of the moniker “Mennonite” is an affectation of churches becoming more worldly who are also composed mostly of ethnic Anabaptists. It is worthwhile to consider why that is.