MennoNet.com

I read with interest how Bootstrap tries to draw a fundamental line between Anabaptism and the alt-right. In some cases, he makes a point, but on the whole I think his position is hopeless.

The great idea which connects both movements is separatism.

Anabaptism began by people withdrawing from the church, withdrawing from the state, retreating into a small self-governed community. In this way it became a precursor of modern Western libertarian pluralism: society as a place were many communities live beneath each other as separate entities.

All the modern leftist thinking is grounded in a fanatical strife for equality, combined with the insight that separate entities are never competely equal - so there must be no separate entities.

This is not new. It was outspoken since the French Revolution (Typically the Revolutionaries tried to install a unified French church, including Catholics, Protestants and Jews.)

Of course I don't think that Anabaptism ought to be racially exclusive. This is not because I deem racial separatism particularly immoral. But Anabaptism is no racial separatism, but religious separatism - and why exclude a person who is honestly attracted to the religion because of his/her race? (As well as a racial community would not exclude a person because of his/her religion.)

On the other hand, any religious community which has a peculiar feature will attract peculiar people. Traditional anabaptism will attract people who are rather introverted, quiet and disciplined - a certain biological and cultural kind of people. In this way, religious and racial/ethnic communities are overlapping. ("Holy rollers" will attract a completely different kind of people.)

The only way to avoid this is avoiding any peculiar feature. Anabaptists can try to include different ethnies and races with the definite hope to overcome any peculiar feature (this seems to be the basic idea behind some modern Anabaptist voices) - but then why uphold a peculiar religious community at all? In this case, why not going back to the uniform (Catholic) church before 1500?

On the long run, religious separatism and racial separatism will survive together - or getting extinct together.

Considering the majority of Anabaptists are black, not white, perhaps the question to be asking is why Anabaptism appeals best to Africans.

Josh wrote:Considering the majority of Anabaptists are black, not white, perhaps the question to be asking is why Anabaptism appeals best to Africans.

Anabaptists or Mennonites? I'm under the impression that most African Mennonites are more akin to Evangelicals and Charismatics than 16th century Anabaptists.

Wayne in Maine wrote:

Josh wrote:Considering the majority of Anabaptists are black, not white, perhaps the question to be asking is why Anabaptism appeals best to Africans.

Anabaptists or Mennonites? I'm under the impression that most African Mennonites are more akin to Evangelicals and Charismatics than 16th century Anabaptists.

Yeah, same here. I have a friend in Ethiopia and he's visited one of the Mennonite churches over there. The way I understand, it looks nothing like a Mennonite Church and something very much like a charismatic Pentecostal church.

Wayne in Maine wrote:

Josh wrote:Considering the majority of Anabaptists are black, not white, perhaps the question to be asking is why Anabaptism appeals best to Africans.

Anabaptists or Mennonites? I'm under the impression that most African Mennonites are more akin to Evangelicals and Charismatics than 16th century Anabaptists.

I’m more focused on one’s acceptance of Jesus’ commands regarding nonresistance than I am about worship styles.

Josh wrote:

Wayne in Maine wrote:

Josh wrote:Considering the majority of Anabaptists are black, not white, perhaps the question to be asking is why Anabaptism appeals best to Africans.

Anabaptists or Mennonites? I'm under the impression that most African Mennonites are more akin to Evangelicals and Charismatics than 16th century Anabaptists.

I’m more focused on one’s acceptance of Jesus’ commands regarding nonresistance than I am about worship styles.

"Anabaptism" is more than just a matter of nonresistance - and I do believe that following Jesus in the manner of the early Anabaptists and early church has an impact on what one might call "worship style".

Josh wrote:Considering the majority of Anabaptists are black, not white, perhaps the question to be asking is why Anabaptism appeals best to Africans.

Yes, but this is a real question, and I am somewhat miffed that it is not explained by the Menno media.
For there are different possibilities!
First, who has normally the decision? An individual (e.g. pupil), a family father, the chief of a tribe?
Then, do they join just the denomination which is with them (e.g. has a school in the village)? Or are they to make a choice between competing denominations?
In this case the situation is different in Congo (were Mennonites are perhaps seen as an alternative to the colonial Catholic church) and in Ethiopia (where there was no colonial church).
Then, there's the question of personality. Mennonism might well appeal to Blacks who feel somewhat more quiet or disciplined than their peers (even if they don't look particularly quiet and disciplined in our eyes).
(My pet theory: Mennonism appeals to Blacks because it exudes a combination of practical-mindedness and helpfulness. Mennonites have left village and agriculture not so long ago and can better empathize with Blacks who are often in a comparable situation.)

Josh wrote:

Wayne in Maine wrote:

Josh wrote:Considering the majority of Anabaptists are black, not white, perhaps the question to be asking is why Anabaptism appeals best to Africans.

Anabaptists or Mennonites? I'm under the impression that most African Mennonites are more akin to Evangelicals and Charismatics than 16th century Anabaptists.

I’m more focused on one’s acceptance of Jesus’ commands regarding nonresistance than I am about worship styles.

I wonder just what all is meant by obeying being nonresistant. Perhaps another thread ?

Imo, 'nonresistance' is thought of too much in just a physical violence sense. I know I often don't 'turn the other cheek' here on this forum when I get slapped for a certain point of view. Imo, many Anabaptists, like other Christians, are quite resistant to being challenged and are ready to fight, sometimes even in a violent verbal manner.

Jesus said to respond to evil treatment actively and seek to overcome evil by doing good to all people and in every situation. Jesus’ admonitions and example, was always actively working toward forgiveness, reconciliation, love, and mercy and keeping away from participation in all violence, wars, hate, and abuse. This would include all professing believers, I would think.

Well, thats another topic.

and why exclude a person who is honestly attracted to the religion because of his/her race?

Cause they're honestly not attracted to True Religion... To me, one who's attracted to a group because of race is not transformed in accordance to Scripture.

This thread seems tilted towards some impossible desire to ascribe socio-analytics to what, in actuality, Is likely all the work of the Holy Spirit.

When you try to explain religion with the secular, something isn't going to add up.

KingdomBuilder wrote:

and why exclude a person who is honestly attracted to the religion because of his/her race?

Cause they're honestly not attracted to True Religion... To me, one who's attracted to a group because of race is not transformed in accordance to Scripture.
.

I see that I wrote a sentence which is highly ambiguous.
What I wanted to say is "Why exclude a person - because of his/her race - from a religious group to which he/she is attracted?"

I didn't want to speak about persons who are attracted to a religious group because of the race of its members. This certainly happens and is quite normal - people will in any case prefer company of people who are somewhat similar to them, mostly by experience - but of course I would not recommend to let someone join a church if religion is not the central motive.