Poll: Faith Traditions that Profess Christianity

[Ernie]

The poll is for individuals who visit MN. The poll is not, "What does your church stand for? or "Where does your church fit?"

[Ernie]

Also, some terms have been used in a sense different from common usage, such as "Mainline". In the way this term is normally used (or at least in the past - maybe I have not kept up with changes), it refers only to the old Protestant denominations, which in my somewhat more fuzzy understanding would require the practice of infant baptism, and possibly also more-than-symbolic views of the bread & the wine in communion.

If "Mainstream Anabaptist" communicates better, you could insert that instead of "Mainline Anabaptist".

[Ernie]

I have not responded to the poll, because the classifications follow only the Swiss Brethren tradition, excluding Dutch Mennonites altogether, all the way back to Menno Simons.

I'm interested in hearing why you think Dutch Mennonites don't fit. When I created the poll options, I assumed that they would apply to Dutch Mennonites as well.

[Josh]

I have not responded to the poll, because the classifications follow only the Swiss Brethren tradition, excluding Dutch Mennonites altogether, all the way back to Menno Simons. I would also suggest that it is actually following a later preoccupation in Swiss Brethren circles with the use of "outward appearances". (Like a specific style of dress, for both male & female. But I am not referring to things like the veiling.) I am not criticizing this approach, and nor is this an appeal to change anyone's standards for practice, just saying that people of my heritage do not fit anywhere here. (I'm reminded of the time, way back when I first got to know non-Dutch Mennonites for the first time, a discussion of what would be a good symbol of "Mennonite culture". I mentioned the zwiebach as a symbol of the survival of our people, and the Deitsch people looked at me with blank looks - they didn't even know what I was talking about. I did not realize that this bread is only made in the Plautdietsch culture, not at all in the PA Deitsch culture.)

I'm not entirely sure I'd agree with zweibach as a symbol either. Holdemans are largely a Russian Mennonite group in background, although they accepted Swiss Brethren, Lutherans, and a variety of other people as well. Yet zweibach is extinct (my in laws don't know what it is or care about it), at least in the U.S.; perhaps some people in Canada know what it is. On the flip side, everyone in my congregation gets excited about making pepper nuts (Pfeffernusse) at Christmastime - even the Swiss background people. In other circles I've never seen pepper nuts at all.

It is definitely true, however, that the Dutch Anabaptist background means much less focus on "dress issues". Holdemans don't even generally think of themselves as "plain people" or "conservative", even though by any practical definition, they are.

Also, some terms have been used in a sense different from common usage, such as "Mainline". In the way this term is normally used (or at least in the past - maybe I have not kept up with changes), it refers only to the old Protestant denominations, which in my somewhat more fuzzy understanding would require the practice of infant baptism, and possibly also more-than-symbolic views of the bread & the wine in communion.

It is a novel term I think Ernie invented (or maybe I did), but I like it too. We can identify people in Mennonite churches that are basically identical to the mainline Protestant Methodist church down the street. We should call these people Anabaptists (Mainline). Likewise, we can identify ones that are progressive, just like the progressive Methodist church across town. We should call them Anabaptists (Progressive-Liberal). And then we can identify Mennonite churches that seem very much like an evangelical church. We should call them Anabaptists (Evangelical).

I do think a distinction should be made for Anabaptists (Theological-Conservative), who definitely do exist as a distinct thing. The Theological-Conservative (like Rosedale / CMC) wouldn't ordain women, but the Evangelical (LMC / Lancaster Conference), Progressive-Liberal (MC USA Central District Conference), and Mainline (MC USA Virginia Conference) all would.

Now, let's ask the question if these categories Ernie proposed fit Russian Mennonite / Dutch Anabaptist background people. I think they can:

Anabaptist (Progressive-Liberal) - yes, MC USA Central District Conference has a large Russian Mennonite background

Anabaptist (Mainline) - yes, Canadian Conference of MBs ordain women, but do not accept LGBT marriage/ordinations

Anabaptist (Evangelical) - yes, some U.S. MBs are essentially evangelical in orientation (particularly the "mega church" style ones)

Anabaptist (non-Plain Theological Conservative) - I don't actually know of any Russian Mennonite background groups that align neatly with the philosophy that prevails in Rosedale / CMC. I am reasonably certain it would exist though, probably amongst U.S. MB background people.

Anabaptist (Plain Conservative) - Holdemans would be an obvious example of this. Kleine Gemeinde (Oklahoma / Texas) would be another.

Anabaptist (Old Order) - Old Colonists would be an obvious example of this.

Of note is that Dutch Anabaptists who persist today often were organised along very ethnic lines, so you have Chortitzers, Molosch, Polsch, and others. Amongst Holdemans the Russian Mennonite background is basically Polsch and Molosch and these groups tended not to intermarry until around 40-50 years ago. There may be significant cultural differences between them that persist to this day.

[Josh]

Also, some terms have been used in a sense different from common usage, such as "Mainline". In the way this term is normally used (or at least in the past - maybe I have not kept up with changes), it refers only to the old Protestant denominations, which in my somewhat more fuzzy understanding would require the practice of infant baptism, and possibly also more-than-symbolic views of the bread & the wine in communion.

If "Mainstream Anabaptist" communicates better, you could insert that instead of "Mainline Anabaptist".

As a slight point, mainline Protestants consist of both infant baptisers and believers' baptisers; specifically, the American Baptist Churches are considered mainline Protestant, but also are (obviously) Baptists. Views on transubstantiation or the real presence would vary as well, Baptists would have a memorial view; Lutherans would have Luther's view, Presbyterians hold to a memorial view, whereas Anglicans would have a real presence sort of view (although they are of two different minds of a "pneumatic presence" or a "corporal presence"). I'm not sure what the Methodist view is.

[Ernie]

Anabaptist (Evangelical) - yes, some U.S. MBs are essentially evangelical in orientation (particularly the "mega church" style ones)

Anabaptist (non-Plain Theological Conservative) - I don't actually know of any Russian Mennonite background groups that align neatly with the philosophy that prevails in Rosedale / CMC. I am reasonably certain it would exist though, probably amongst U.S. MB background people.

What is the difference between these two? I see them as the same thing.

[Josh]

Anabaptist (Evangelical) - yes, some U.S. MBs are essentially evangelical in orientation (particularly the "mega church" style ones)

Anabaptist (non-Plain Theological Conservative) - I don't actually know of any Russian Mennonite background groups that align neatly with the philosophy that prevails in Rosedale / CMC. I am reasonably certain it would exist though, probably amongst U.S. MB background people.

What is the difference between these two? I see them as the same thing.

Evangelicals would ordain women but perhaps in a "restrained" way (perhaps not to lead pastor, for example).

Theological Conservatives don't ordain women at all.

Overall, a Theological-Conservative church just doesn't feel exactly like an evangelical church. I suspect a handful of congregations in Rosedale / CMC are becoming generic evangelical churches, but they also might decide to "move on" from the Rosedale network as that happens too.

Theological-Conservatives usually have a few Anabaptist customs like footwashing, for example (the CMC church I used to attend did this and I participated, or rather, another churchgoer there invited me to participate); FEC does this as well. The MC USA church myself and my brother used to attend didn't engage in footwashing when we went there; after they disaffiliated from MC USA & Ohio Conference and joined FEC, this was a practice they were asked to take up, although I'm not sure what FEC's stance on women's ordination is these days.

To clarify, the "pathway" of acculturation seems to have two possible routes:

Old Order -> Plain Conservative (this can be skipped) -> Mainline -> Progressive-Liberal

Old Order -> Plain Conservative -> Theological Conservative -> Evangelical

It remains to be seen if the fundamentalist evangelical alignment remains stable or eventually will evolve into mainlines or progressive-liberals.

[Ernie]

It is a novel term I think Ernie invented (or maybe I did), but I like it too. We can identify people in Mennonite churches that are basically identical to the mainline Protestant Methodist church down the street. We should call these people Anabaptists (Mainline).

I didn't know it was novel.

Joshua Lindsey uses it here...
www.youtube.com/watch?v=Dy_Uyc3_b0s&t=637s
and here...
www.youtube.com/watch?v=WkXXjAf06X4


Mennonite Mission Network / Third Way Cafe uses it here.
https://www.mennonitemission.net/news/T ... a%20decade

[Ernie]

Evangelicals would ordain women but perhaps in a "restrained" way (perhaps not to lead pastor, for example).

Theological Conservatives don't ordain women at all.

Then we need to say Anabaptist (Conservative Evangelical) because many Evangelicals support women as lead pastors.

But "conservative" doesn't work because there are many Pentecostal churches with women lead pastors.

So then we are down to "theological conservative" which is what the poll option says.

So yes, "non-Plain, Theological Conservatives" refers to any Anabaptist church that does not allow women as pastors or lead pastors.

[Neto]

I have not responded to the poll, because the classifications follow only the Swiss Brethren tradition, excluding Dutch Mennonites altogether, all the way back to Menno Simons.

I'm interested in hearing why you think Dutch Mennonites don't fit. When I created the poll options, I assumed that they would apply to Dutch Mennonites as well.

I do not want to create a diversion in this thread, nor do i wish to start another discussion about the Matthew passage in respect to divorce and remarriage, but that passage is understood by Menno Simons as allowing remarriage in the case of persistent and unrepentant adultery. (Whereas the Swiss Brethren position, at least as it has been "back-described" - meaning I have not seen any writings from the early period that speak to this question, only current era statements that it was such-and-so - do not make any such concession or provision.)

Another major difference is that the church governance in at least the MB conference is markedly different than that of any Swiss Brethren background congregation to which I have been exposed (admittedly, almost entirely Beach Amish-Mennonite and its off-shoots, of which our congregation is an example). I also do not know how far this goes back in even the MB history, let alone in the larger "Russian Mennonite" fold. (However, I suspect that the early MBs - which started in 1860 - were a bit more like your typical top-down authority structure, with some mix of congregationalism. Then I would also suspect that the Colony Gross Gemeinde was basically purely authoritarian, like the typical Amish-Mennonite congregations here in Holmes County, but this is not something I have studied in particular.)