Swiss Brethren?

Christian ethics and theology with an Anabaptist perspective
MaxPC
Posts: 9044
Joined: Sat Oct 22, 2016 9:09 pm
Location: Former full time RVers
Affiliation: PlainRomanCatholic
Contact:

Re: Swiss Brethren?

Post by MaxPC »

ohio jones wrote:
MaxPC wrote:So Zwingli opened his own can of worms so to speak when while he still supported infant baptism, other reformers banned it when they took his proposed reforms a few steps further? The wiki article on him says he was killed in battle.
He was being nibbled at from both ends, if the worm is the relevant analogy. Many people were leaving his church and cleaving to the Anabaptist movement (who of course did not practice infant baptism, and persuaded others to abandon it, but had no power to ban it, nor did they desire to do so with the political tools Zwingli exercised). On the other end, Catholics were up in arms at the reforms he did make, and it was they who massacred the Zurich army in the second battle of Kappel, where he died.
There was a lot of violence committed by all sides in those times and I always feel that there was a great wailing in heaven over the violence.
0 x
Max (Plain Catholic)
Mt 24:35
Proverbs 18:2 A fool does not delight in understanding but only in revealing his own mind.
1 Corinthians 3:19 For the wisdom of this world is folly with God
ken_sylvania
Posts: 3969
Joined: Tue Nov 01, 2016 12:46 pm
Affiliation: CM

Re: Swiss Brethren?

Post by ken_sylvania »

MaxPC wrote:
ohio jones wrote:
MaxPC wrote:So Zwingli opened his own can of worms so to speak when while he still supported infant baptism, other reformers banned it when they took his proposed reforms a few steps further? The wiki article on him says he was killed in battle.
He was being nibbled at from both ends, if the worm is the relevant analogy. Many people were leaving his church and cleaving to the Anabaptist movement (who of course did not practice infant baptism, and persuaded others to abandon it, but had no power to ban it, nor did they desire to do so with the political tools Zwingli exercised). On the other end, Catholics were up in arms at the reforms he did make, and it was they who massacred the Zurich army in the second battle of Kappel, where he died.
There was a lot of violence committed by all sides in those times and I always feel that there was a great wailing in heaven over the violence.
I do not believe that is an accurate statement. I have never heard of violence being condoned by the Swiss Brethren, certainly not "a lot of violence."
0 x
MaxPC
Posts: 9044
Joined: Sat Oct 22, 2016 9:09 pm
Location: Former full time RVers
Affiliation: PlainRomanCatholic
Contact:

Re: Swiss Brethren?

Post by MaxPC »

ken_sylvania wrote:
MaxPC wrote:
ohio jones wrote: He was being nibbled at from both ends, if the worm is the relevant analogy. Many people were leaving his church and cleaving to the Anabaptist movement (who of course did not practice infant baptism, and persuaded others to abandon it, but had no power to ban it, nor did they desire to do so with the political tools Zwingli exercised). On the other end, Catholics were up in arms at the reforms he did make, and it was they who massacred the Zurich army in the second battle of Kappel, where he died.
There was a lot of violence committed by all sides in those times and I always feel that there was a great wailing in heaven over the violence.
I do not believe that is an accurate statement. I have never heard of violence being condoned by the Swiss Brethren, certainly not "a lot of violence."
A lot of violence was committed in that historic period and there were violent men from all sides involved, according to recounts of Anabaptist history by the forum members. Any violence, be it violence of the heart, the tongue, or the hand is wrong and I feel it's a grievance to heaven. I don't think the Swiss Brethren as a group enacted violence but as some have said here, there were individuals who chose that path. I do try to understand that era and I think the reformation was ultimately a good thing for all Christians. I do grieve about the violence of words and actions though. Mudslinging never helps a topic, only attempts to derail it: it's discourteous to seekers and scholars. Now back to the thread topic, the history of the Swiss Brethren.
0 x
Max (Plain Catholic)
Mt 24:35
Proverbs 18:2 A fool does not delight in understanding but only in revealing his own mind.
1 Corinthians 3:19 For the wisdom of this world is folly with God
Neto
Posts: 4576
Joined: Wed Oct 19, 2016 5:43 pm
Location: Holmes County, Ohio
Affiliation: Gospel Haven

Re: Swiss Brethren?

Post by Neto »

In our congregation here in Ohio, I am 1 of 2 who have Dutch Mennonite heritage. (The other is a lady from Canada.) There are also now some Swiss Brethren background people in the MB (Mennonite Brethren) congregation I grew up in out in Oklahoma, but then the majority of the members there have no Mennonite background at all.

MBs are not necessarily typical of the other DMs, so what I say here should be taken in that light. But I would say that the biggest difference I have seen is the type of congregational governance. MBs at least, are strongly congregational, where as Swiss Brethren are typically top-down (where the 'leadership team' pretty well calls all of the shots). MBs don't have "members' meetings" where they are informed regarding what actions are being taken, but rather "congregational business meetings", where decisions are made as a group, through group discussion & voting, generally with secret ballot. Both models are open to some abuses, but I do personally feel that congregational governance is the best representation of Christian brotherhood.
0 x
Congregation: Gospel Haven Mennonite Fellowship, Benton, Ohio (Holmes Co.) a split from Beachy-Amish Mennonite.
Personal heritage & general theological viewpoint: conservative Mennonite Brethren.
MaxPC
Posts: 9044
Joined: Sat Oct 22, 2016 9:09 pm
Location: Former full time RVers
Affiliation: PlainRomanCatholic
Contact:

Re: Swiss Brethren?

Post by MaxPC »

Neto wrote:In our congregation here in Ohio, I am 1 of 2 who have Dutch Mennonite heritage. (The other is a lady from Canada.) There are also now some Swiss Brethren background people in the MB (Mennonite Brethren) congregation I grew up in out in Oklahoma, but then the majority of the members there have no Mennonite background at all.

MBs are not necessarily typical of the other DMs, so what I say here should be taken in that light. But I would say that the biggest difference I have seen is the type of congregational governance. MBs at least, are strongly congregational, where as Swiss Brethren are typically top-down (where the 'leadership team' pretty well calls all of the shots). MBs don't have "members' meetings" where they are informed regarding what actions are being taken, but rather "congregational business meetings", where decisions are made as a group, through group discussion & voting, generally with secret ballot. Both models are open to some abuses, but I do personally feel that congregational governance is the best representation of Christian brotherhood.
Thank you, Neto.
Query: Is it possible among Anabaptists that as congregations grow, get new members, etc. their forms of leadership/governance change into a blend or transform to the opposite style completely? I'm seeing this occur now (not in Anabaptist circles but in other venues).

Another query: You mentioned that the OK MB congregation of your childhood had a majority of members with no Mennonite background. Were they converts or did they marry into the congregation?
0 x
Max (Plain Catholic)
Mt 24:35
Proverbs 18:2 A fool does not delight in understanding but only in revealing his own mind.
1 Corinthians 3:19 For the wisdom of this world is folly with God
Neto
Posts: 4576
Joined: Wed Oct 19, 2016 5:43 pm
Location: Holmes County, Ohio
Affiliation: Gospel Haven

Re: Swiss Brethren?

Post by Neto »

MaxPC wrote:
Neto wrote:In our congregation here in Ohio, I am 1 of 2 who have Dutch Mennonite heritage. (The other is a lady from Canada.) There are also now some Swiss Brethren background people in the MB (Mennonite Brethren) congregation I grew up in out in Oklahoma, but then the majority of the members there have no Mennonite background at all.

MBs are not necessarily typical of the other DMs, so what I say here should be taken in that light. But I would say that the biggest difference I have seen is the type of congregational governance. MBs at least, are strongly congregational, where as Swiss Brethren are typically top-down (where the 'leadership team' pretty well calls all of the shots). MBs don't have "members' meetings" where they are informed regarding what actions are being taken, but rather "congregational business meetings", where decisions are made as a group, through group discussion & voting, generally with secret ballot. Both models are open to some abuses, but I do personally feel that congregational governance is the best representation of Christian brotherhood.
Thank you, Neto.
Query: Is it possible among Anabaptists that as congregations grow, get new members, etc. their forms of leadership/governance change into a blend or transform to the opposite style completely? I'm seeing this occur now (not in Anabaptist circles but in other venues).

Another query: You mentioned that the OK MB congregation of your childhood had a majority of members with no Mennonite background. Were they converts or did they marry into the congregation?
As it has grown in size, that congregation has moved toward a top-down leadership style in recent years, but it may have slowed because of the moral failure (ie sin) of the former lead pastor, I don't know. They have also been getting their pastors from outside the anabaptist tradition, and I personally do not think that policy is serving them well. (I'm not talking about ethnicity, but training & doctrinal orientation.)

Regarding the non-Mennonite background character of the congregation - some were true converts, others came from Protestant churches in the area that were going through internal upheavals, and a few were marry-ins. Since that is the "Bible Belt", most were coming in from other Christian churches in the area. (One of our youth sponsors at the time I was in HS later told me privately that he had grown spiritually in the MB church, and that if he had had that level of spiritual maturity when he came there, he wouldn't have. In other words, he was admitting that his reason for leaving his former congregation was in some sense petty. He never told me what it was, but it was apparently not to do with actual belief, but some other issue in that congregation.) Another couple that I grew close to because we were later in Bible Institute together stopped in one Sunday morning out of desperation, "not knowing if those Mennonites will let us in the door". Their marriage was in the last throes of death, she was a bar tender, and he had a very high paying job in the aviation industry. They were welcomed, got saved, and he later gave up his job and went to Bible Institute to become a minister.

In which direction are you seeing changes in governance style?
0 x
Congregation: Gospel Haven Mennonite Fellowship, Benton, Ohio (Holmes Co.) a split from Beachy-Amish Mennonite.
Personal heritage & general theological viewpoint: conservative Mennonite Brethren.
Hats Off
Posts: 2532
Joined: Thu Feb 09, 2017 6:42 pm
Affiliation: Plain Menno OO

Re: Swiss Brethren?

Post by Hats Off »

RZehr wrote:I can't answer that question for each person in the group, but probably Reist since I don't know of any Amish (Amman) in my own ancestry.
Zehr would actually be an Amish name, according to my understanding. GAMEO would support my belief. Zehr was/is a fairly common name in Ontario, although most would possibly identify as Mennonite today.

Hans Reist was a brother to my Reist ancestor.
0 x
Hats Off
Posts: 2532
Joined: Thu Feb 09, 2017 6:42 pm
Affiliation: Plain Menno OO

Re: Swiss Brethren?

Post by Hats Off »

Bootstrap wrote:
Hats Off wrote:The majority of Mennonites and Amish in eastern Canada and U.S. are from Swiss Brethern background. The majority of Mennonites in Western Canada and U.S. are of Dutch heritage, the Menno Simons branch.
RZehr wrote:Its been a long time since I studied anything on the Swiss Brethren and I'm not knowledgeable much beyond being familiar with the names (George Blaurock, Conrad Grebel, Felix Manz, Michael Sattler) and the big picture. I don't know all the details of what each one believed or wrote.

This is a pretty good over view in my opinion. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Swiss_Brethren
The names on both branches have been mentioned quite a bit in the Mennonite churches I have been in. How many churches are cleanly on one side of the divide? Are most influenced by both branches?

If you attended a church, what would tell you which branch it was most influenced by? What differences would affect actual practice?
My first indication would be common names.
0 x
User avatar
Bootstrap
Posts: 14439
Joined: Thu Oct 20, 2016 9:59 am
Affiliation: Mennonite

Re: Swiss Brethren?

Post by Bootstrap »

MaxPC wrote:A lot of violence was committed in that historic period and there were violent men from all sides involved, according to recounts of Anabaptist history by the forum members. Any violence, be it violence of the heart, the tongue, or the hand is wrong and I feel it's a grievance to heaven. I don't think the Swiss Brethren as a group enacted violence but as some have said here, there were individuals who chose that path. I do try to understand that era and I think the reformation was ultimately a good thing for all Christians. I do grieve about the violence of words and actions though. Mudslinging never helps a topic, only attempts to derail it: it's discourteous to seekers and scholars. Now back to the thread topic, the history of the Swiss Brethren.
Max, I think they were talking about the history of the Swiss Brethren. When we look at history to learn from it, some of these things come up. When we look at the differences between Swiss Brethren and Dutch Mennonites, we also bump into the differences between them and various groups who tortured and killed many of them, and persecuted many others. All of the State churches - Catholics, Lutherans, Calvinists, and Zwinglians - did this, and the 30 Years War was another grievous testimony to religion gone wrong. That was not something that some individuals did, that was something entire churches did, aligned with the State. And I have no problem saying that they were wrong to do these things.

I don't know how we can learn anything useful from history without learning that, and it teaches us important things about false religion. When Mennonites look back at that history, we tend to identify with those who were persecuted because they did what they believed was right. So if you ask us about our history, you are going to hear about what it means to us.

Now let's face it, we are not our ancestors, and both the Catholic Church and various strands of Mennonites have grown and changed. It's much more possible for Catholics and Mennonites to have fellowship and serve together today. But this history is one of the things that makes the whole notion of a Plain Catholic strange to me - when you look back at this history, do you identify with the Mennonites or the Catholics or both? What does it mean for a Catholic to wear clothing that identifies with those that the Catholics persecuted? I assume you do not believe that Mennonites should be allowed to take communion at a Catholic church. I have seen no evidence that Plain Catholics exist, but if they did ... what would it even mean?
0 x
Is it biblical? Is it Christlike? Is it loving? Is it true? How can I find out?
User avatar
Wayne in Maine
Posts: 1195
Joined: Fri Oct 21, 2016 5:52 am
Location: Slightly above sea level, in the dear old State of Maine
Affiliation: Yielded

Re: Swiss Brethren?

Post by Wayne in Maine »

MaxPC wrote:
ken_sylvania wrote:
MaxPC wrote: There was a lot of violence committed by all sides in those times and I always feel that there was a great wailing in heaven over the violence.
I do not believe that is an accurate statement. I have never heard of violence being condoned by the Swiss Brethren, certainly not "a lot of violence."
A lot of violence was committed in that historic period and there were violent men from all sides involved, according to recounts of Anabaptist history by the forum members. Any violence, be it violence of the heart, the tongue, or the hand is wrong and I feel it's a grievance to heaven. I don't think the Swiss Brethren as a group enacted violence but as some have said here, there were individuals who chose that path. I do try to understand that era and I think the reformation was ultimately a good thing for all Christians. I do grieve about the violence of words and actions though. Mudslinging never helps a topic, only attempts to derail it: it's discourteous to seekers and scholars. Now back to the thread topic, the history of the Swiss Brethren.
This is one of the important distinctions between the Territorial churches (Roman, Protestant, Reformed and Orthodox) and the Anabaptists. If a member of a Swiss Brethren congregation violated the church's agreed-to practices, such as committing violence, he would be removed from the church. But in a church where one is baptized into membership involuntarily, as an infant and where one's religion is determined by what country he was born in, putting someone under the ban is not really an option.

The point is, any Swiss Brethren who chose the path of violence would not longer be a Swiss Brethren, and his actions could not be blamed on a member of that church. The Swiss Brethren never committed violence against anyone.
0 x
Post Reply