I grew up Beachy and was under that umbrella for 50 + years.buckeyematt2 wrote:I did read it, and have it at home...I'd have to review it again. If I remember correctly, I didn't always agree with him - particularly where he disparaged the hymn, "On Christ the Solid Rock I Stand", and some other theological nuances. (I'd have to review the section on Pelagius and Augustine as well to see if he comes down in favor of Pelagius, or in between). But I thought it was a good call to kingdom living overall.GaryK wrote: buckeyematt2, I'm wondering if you have read David Bercot's book "The Kingdom That Turned the World Upside Down" and if you have what your thoughts are about it?
I don't know what your thoughts are about the direction of many "conservative Anabaptist" churches, but I believe one of the big reasons for what I consider a wrong direction stems directly back to the attempt to assimilate the Protestant Evangelical "gospel" into an Anabaptist worldview. It has produced a hybrid that, in my view, hasn't had a good outcome.
I think there is an endeavor being made by some to rediscover the "heirloom" variety of Kingdom Christianity Bercot writes about in his book. It's been a while since I've read the book but I believe radical obedience to the teachings of Jesus is a pretty major thread throughout.
While I'm a member of a Beachy congregation, my own views are somewhere in the range of the BMA or maybe the Oasis Tabernacle in Sugarcreek, OH. So personally, I see a lot of recent changes (both in standards, and in emphasis on grace rather than works, etc.) as good things, becoming more Biblical rather than traditional, and as necessary correctives to some holdover Amish thinking and traditions. I understand some NMB's here (not saying you are an NMB, I don't know) approach it from the other angle, where Anabaptism is a necessary correction to things in mainline evangelicalism, so they might be more inclined to conservative attitudes and rejection of evangelicalism. And a question for you - Where and how do you think something started to go wrong? Just considering the Beachys as an example, what do you think about the revivalist or "evangelical" transformation of the Beachys in the mid-1900s - did something go wrong there? Should they have stayed more Old Order? After all, the revivalists borrowed theology from Mennonite evangelists who in turn borrowed from Protestants.
http://gameo.org/index.php?title=Beachy ... _1946-1977
I remember in 2009, while teaching a class on Anabaptist history at CBS, it saddened me to discover that less than 100 years (if I'm remembering correctly) after the beginning of the Anabaptist movement they began retreating into the "quiet in the land" mode. I think this is where things started to go wrong. What followed produced the Amish split from the Mennonites and a further departure from the genius of the early Anabaptist movement. I believe the "evangelical" revivalist movements were attempts to "fix" the natural outcome of the "quiet in the land" worldview that seemed to have become very inward focused.
I wonder how well Beachys and others of that day knew early Anabaptist history because it puzzles me that they would adopt an approach that had its roots in a movement that in many cases violently persecuted the early Anabaptists. I think they would have been much better served to try to rediscover the early Anabaptist vision that promoted the kind of Kingdom Christianity Bercot writes about rather than adopting the "theology from Mennonite evangelists who in turn borrowed from Protestants." I'm doubtful that such an approach would have remained very Old Order in nature but I do believe it would have produced a much different result than we see today because the premise for change would have much more solid.