Heirbyadoption wrote: ↑Mon Mar 18, 2024 9:50 am... 3 questions...:
....
Regarding the third question, do you think it was worded in this way to focus only on one's fellow members? I'm not being critical, but the thing that had me anguishing for several days is a conflict that has only very recently come to our attention, hard feelings toward us that go back more than 20 years. This is someone outside of our congregation, but also believers. I finally decided I would just write it out in my response, that I have complete peace with everyone in our congregation to the furtherest of my knowledge, but am not "at peace" with some other people. (If you look back at our own congregation's question, it doesn't even specify if 'man' refers to believers, or also includes non-believers.) I expected to receive a call from one of our preachers, but didn't. I prayed for some revelation from God, but the only 'word' I got was that after writing that out honestly and submitting it, I felt more at peace about it than I had for many days. (We have been interacting with those concerned ever since they voiced this complaint.)
It's a valid question (yours, that is, lol). Part of the wording is a hold-over from our previous conference and the multi-century perpetuation of the exact same question, along with an emphasis upon one's fellow members only. We never actually held an OTC position like the Holdemans, but there was certainly some historical resemblance..."). It's also tied to the fact that we still practice close communion (members of our conference only) at this point.
Having said all that, we actually do make a distinct point to specifically address that aspect of question 3 on our Annual Visit with each member, as our group tends to be significantly more open to fellowshipping and interacting with other likeminded believers than we were historically (when we were part of the larger conference we developed from 15 years ago). The thought is that the need for peace between Christians begins first and foremost with those closest to home (ie. our fellow members), but that it does indeed extend beyond our membership to other believers in other fellowships, and even nonbelievers if there's a conflict where the individual being Visited has not exhausted their own effort to make peace (ie. "as much as lies within you...").
Yes, the "as much as lieth within you". I've heard people say, "Well, it doesn't lie within me."
How is the Scripture text ACTUALLY to be understood? Does it refer to "as much as the RESPONSIBILITY for the lapse in fellowship "lies with me"? I think that should certainly be considered.
Or, does it mean that one should make every possible effort (following the Scriptural process) to restore every broken relationship?
(I would be very interested to hear your thoughts on this.)
1 x
Congregation: Gospel Haven Mennonite Fellowship, Benton, Ohio (Holmes Co.) a split from Beachy-Amish Mennonite.
Personal heritage & general theological viewpoint: conservative Mennonite Brethren.
Neto wrote: ↑Mon Mar 18, 2024 6:28 pmRegarding the third question, do you think it was worded in this way to focus only on one's fellow members? I'm not being critical, but the thing that had me anguishing for several days is a conflict that has only very recently come to our attention, hard feelings toward us that go back more than 20 years. This is someone outside of our congregation, but also believers. I finally decided I would just write it out in my response, that I have complete peace with everyone in our congregation to the furtherest of my knowledge, but am not "at peace" with some other people. (If you look back at our own congregation's question, it doesn't even specify if 'man' refers to believers, or also includes non-believers.) I expected to receive a call from one of our preachers, but didn't. I prayed for some revelation from God, but the only 'word' I got was that after writing that out honestly and submitting it, I felt more at peace about it than I had for many days. (We have been interacting with those concerned ever since they voiced this complaint.)
It's a valid question (yours, that is, lol). Part of the wording is a hold-over from our previous conference and the multi-century perpetuation of the exact same question, along with an emphasis upon one's fellow members only. We never actually held an OTC position like the Holdemans, but there was certainly some historical resemblance..."). It's also tied to the fact that we still practice close communion (members of our conference only) at this point.
Having said all that, we actually do make a distinct point to specifically address that aspect of question 3 on our Annual Visit with each member, as our group tends to be significantly more open to fellowshipping and interacting with other likeminded believers than we were historically (when we were part of the larger conference we developed from 15 years ago). The thought is that the need for peace between Christians begins first and foremost with those closest to home (ie. our fellow members), but that it does indeed extend beyond our membership to other believers in other fellowships, and even nonbelievers if there's a conflict where the individual being Visited has not exhausted their own effort to make peace (ie. "as much as lies within you...").
Yes, the "as much as lieth within you". I've heard people say, "Well, it doesn't lie within me."
How is the Scripture text ACTUALLY to be understood? Does it refer to "as much as the RESPONSIBILITY for the lapse in fellowship "lies with me"? I think that should certainly be considered.
Or, does it mean that one should make every possible effort (following the Scriptural process) to restore every broken relationship?
(I would be very interested to hear your thoughts on this.)
I would think it means the latter. Of note, the Matthew 18 process only seems to apply to those who you share the bonds of fellow\wship with. You can't "bring before the body" an outsider or even a non christian. So practically it only goes so far.
Neto wrote: ↑Tue Mar 19, 2024 12:00 pm
Yes, the "as much as lieth within you". I've heard people say, "Well, it doesn't lie within me."
How is the Scripture text ACTUALLY to be understood? Does it refer to "as much as the RESPONSIBILITY for the lapse in fellowship "lies with me"? I think that should certainly be considered.
Or, does it mean that one should make every possible effort (following the Scriptural process) to restore every broken relationship?
(I would be very interested to hear your thoughts on this.)
I would think it means the latter. Of note, the Matthew 18 process only seems to apply to those who you share the bonds of fellowship with. You can't "bring before the body" an outsider or even a non christian. So practically it only goes so far.
How much do you think can be done if the other party IS a believer, and even in a fairly similar type congregation? Arbitration through the respective ministers?
1 x
Congregation: Gospel Haven Mennonite Fellowship, Benton, Ohio (Holmes Co.) a split from Beachy-Amish Mennonite.
Personal heritage & general theological viewpoint: conservative Mennonite Brethren.
Neto wrote: ↑Tue Mar 19, 2024 12:00 pm
Yes, the "as much as lieth within you". I've heard people say, "Well, it doesn't lie within me."
How is the Scripture text ACTUALLY to be understood? Does it refer to "as much as the RESPONSIBILITY for the lapse in fellowship "lies with me"? I think that should certainly be considered.
Or, does it mean that one should make every possible effort (following the Scriptural process) to restore every broken relationship?
(I would be very interested to hear your thoughts on this.)
I would think it means the latter. Of note, the Matthew 18 process only seems to apply to those who you share the bonds of fellowship with. You can't "bring before the body" an outsider or even a non christian. So practically it only goes so far.
How much do you think can be done if the other party IS a believer, and even in a fairly similar type congregation? Arbitration through the respective ministers?
I guess so. Easy if they are both in the same or similar conferences. More difficult if they are not. I have heard (Second or more hand) of a case where a home improvement project was in dispute. Both churches deacons were sent out to look at the situation, and a report sent to the bishops. Did not hear how it came out. My guess it that would be the ideal situation. One thing, is that would be far less expensive than paying lawyers.
I guess with our church membership, we by default accept binding arbitration.
Neto wrote: ↑Sat Mar 16, 2024 9:27 pm
What type of questions are you asked before communion service?
We aren't asked any questions, just expected to give our "peace testimony," the template of which goes like this: "I have peace with God and my fellowman as far as I know, I support the discipline of the church, and I desire to take part in communion."
A person is possibly expected to make any concerns known at this time as well, although that hasn't happened at the times I was present. I usually modify the second statement by saying I support the discipline of the church as I understand it, because I understand there are certain flexibilities in the discipline that aren't reflected by what the document actually says, based on my observation of how the discipline is actually kept by other members.
2 x
Remember the prisoners, as though you were in prison with them, and the mistreated, as though you yourselves were suffering bodily. -Heb. 13:3
Judas Maccabeus wrote: ↑Tue Mar 19, 2024 9:25 pm
I have heard (Second or more hand) of a case where a home improvement project was in dispute. Both churches deacons were sent out to look at the situation, and a report sent to the bishops. Did not hear how it came out.
Bet there is a story behind that. How does a home improvement project become an issue with church discipline?
1 x
I self-identify as a conspiracy theorist. My pronouns are told/you/so.
Judas Maccabeus wrote: ↑Tue Mar 19, 2024 9:25 pm
I have heard (Second or more hand) of a case where a home improvement project was in dispute. Both churches deacons were sent out to look at the situation, and a report sent to the bishops. Did not hear how it came out.
Bet there is a story behind that. How does a home improvement project become an issue with church discipline?
Once again (second or third hand) it was what amounted to a business dispute. Do you settle the matter by suing, or by arbitration? I wish I knew more. It was in the context of a discussion of the "Most interesting thing that deacons have been asked to do". In other words, look before you leap.
