Standards vs Reality

Christian ethics and theology with an Anabaptist perspective
Post Reply
Neto

Re: Standards vs Reality

Post by Neto »

appleman2006 wrote:It has been good for me to read this discussion and to actually have a chance to try and understand how it perhaps feels to be a new person coming into a group. I have experienced this in a small way at one time when I lived in a different area for almost a year but I kind of wrote what I experienced there as a quirk to that community. Now I am thinking this could actually be more common and may even at times be the experience of those that might be new comers in the churches I associate with.
…I would not want to be a part of a group where everyone did things exactly the same or where everyone looked exactly alike. Perhaps that shocks some of you but let me try to explain why.
From my experience when this has been attempted several things happen, perhaps not immediately but over a generation or two.
1. An attempt to do this causes an environment of divisiveness and splinters over the tiniest things. And the splits and divisions never stop. Rather they snowball and happen with ever increasing speed. No one who knows the history of the conservative movement within Mennonites can deny this.
2. As has been alluded to, leaders often are aware of differences of opinions but are reluctant to officially support change even when they know the majority might be in agreement of the change. They see it as potentially causing another split or they think that they will be viewed as the one that let down the standard in their watch. Our churches are littered with wrecks of leaders who have bravely tried to negotiate change and have suffered major personal grief and loss for doing so.
3. Too many fences can actually have the effect of lowering the degree of spirituality and holiness among a group. People start to rely on the fences to keep them and their children in check and with time they are doing the things not because they have any personal convictions about it but rather to fit in. And if enough of them decided that they actually fit in better by not following the letter of the law than guess what happens. This problem is magnified IMO in the last few years due to the fact that churches are finding it is almost impossible to build the fences high enough to keep those in that do not want to be kept in.

From my perspective I think groups that do a good job of keeping their rules and regulations up to date and that are very open about changes with the congregation ensuring the things that are being required are truly the will and conviction of the majority of the congregation will be much better off. But I recognize that in a culture that almost always views change as either being more legalistic or in the other case regressive and a sure sign of worldliness, that this is hard to do.

I am always amazed at how hard a line people will tow on issues, insisting that nothing changes when in fact they themselves are not in the same church that their parents or grandparents were in. If they are honest they will often have to admit that their own convictions have changed on some things over the years.
….
I would also like to thank you for your comments here. (Because I could only 'like' it once.)
I do think that the former outsider has a different feeling about the slackening of congregational guidelines simply because they did NOT grow up with it – they took the risk (sometimes the reality) that their new stance would stress or break the ties with their own family members, or close friends from their past. They came in (I’ll speak for myself – I came in) with the perception that the state of the congregation was more or less static, that the way it was then was the way it had been for a long time, and would continue to be for a long time. It’s kind of like the way people look back at what they call “the good old days” – it is usually the way it was when they were a child, or young adult. Childhood is such a short experience that it gains a sort of timelessness in our memories. It seems that the way it was when we were children is “the way it always was”, when it is really just one little snapshot of history, one frame in a fast moving film strip.
One more point, and then I’ll stop. Fellowshipping with other groups. As adults we can navigate this, but when you have small children, they need to see that Dad & Mom are not the only ones in their whole world that have the standards they do. We faced this on the mission field, working among a diverse group that did not include any other anabaptists, and in fact included Calvinists and other infant baptizers, and God & Country Evangelicals. (That is where the stuff really hit the fan – like other children playing war & killing.)
0 x
Josh

Re: Standards vs Reality

Post by Josh »

I should stress that "blue blood" really doesn't mean just anyone who was born into a conesrvative Mennonite church - it means someone who was born into a specific congregation, grew up there, and has stayed there as an adult. They don't really have any concept of what it is like to have to go somewhere else and learn unwritten rules and customs and the stress of not fitting in, or worse, finding out that some people think you've been a bad example because you weren't obeying some rule you didn't even know about.

Folks like appleman or lesterb who have either spent time away from home in another congregation, or completely switched congregations / fellowships/conferences, I think can relate very well to what it is like for us NMB folk. But the reality is that a typical congregation is composed mostly of people who grew up in that congregation, or else came from a more-strict background. There is virtually nobody who has come from a less-strict background, but still Mennonite background, migrating to more-strict churches.

(I think the latter fact should alarm all of us and make us question just how dead our spirituality really is, and also make us question just how justified we are in judging other Christians for being worldly.)
0 x
RZehr

Re: Standards vs Reality

Post by RZehr »

Josh wrote:I should stress that "blue blood" really doesn't mean just anyone who was born into a conesrvative Mennonite church - it means someone who was born into a specific congregation, grew up there, and has stayed there as an adult. They don't really have any concept of what it is like to have to go somewhere else and learn unwritten rules and customs and the stress of not fitting in, or worse, finding out that some people think you've been a bad example because you weren't obeying some rule you didn't even know about.

Folks like appleman or lesterb who have either spent time away from home in another congregation, or completely switched congregations / fellowships/conferences, I think can relate very well to what it is like for us NMB folk. But the reality is that a typical congregation is composed mostly of people who grew up in that congregation, or else came from a more-strict background. There is virtually nobody who has come from a less-strict background, but still Mennonite background, migrating to more-strict churches.

(I think the latter fact should alarm all of us and make us question just how dead our spirituality really is, and also make us question just how justified we are in judging other Christians for being worldly.)
I guess I still qualify as blue blood then. :shock: We do have one redeeming quality - we help provide stability to a church, which is often taken for granted. Look at the instability some new churches have.

I know of some Mennonites that went from ultra conservative to intermediate conservative and then back to more conservative. I know of at least one that went from intermediate conservative to fundamental and back to intermediate.
0 x
Josh

Re: Standards vs Reality

Post by Josh »

I wonder if anyone goes "up".

I did meet a man a few weeks ago whose father started in Lancaster Conference (in the 1950s) and eventually moved "up" to an Old Order group. His son, the man I met, remained in an evangelical horse and buggy group. So it can and does happen.

The most common shift I see is someone's group essentially changes. (I myself have endured a group in the middle of a transition from moderate to fundamental.) Some congregants cannot accept the changes and then migrate to a different group that isn't changing as fast.
0 x
Neto

Re: Standards vs Reality

Post by Neto »

I know two brothers here in Holmes County who grew up Beachy AM, and joined the Old Order Amish.
0 x
Hats Off

Re: Standards vs Reality

Post by Hats Off »

Josh wrote:I wonder if anyone goes "up".

I did meet a man a few weeks ago whose father started in Lancaster Conference (in the 1950s) and eventually moved "up" to an Old Order group. His son, the man I met, remained in an evangelical horse and buggy group. So it can and does happen.

The most common shift I see is someone's group essentially changes. (I myself have endured a group in the middle of a transition from moderate to fundamental.) Some congregants cannot accept the changes and then migrate to a different group that isn't changing as fast.
What is an evangelical horse and buggy group, Stauffers? Orthodox?
0 x
cmbl

Re: Standards vs Reality

Post by cmbl »

Josh wrote:I wonder if anyone goes "up".
There are of course, NMB's who move "up". One conservative Mennonite I talked with commented on how sometimes they keep going until they get to the Old Order, then leave, saying that it's all form.

(Note: I don't think Old Orders are all form-I'm just reporting another man's understanding of a restless NMB's mindset.)
But the reality is that a typical congregation is composed mostly of people who grew up in that congregation, or else came from a more-strict background. There is virtually nobody who has come from a less-strict background, but still Mennonite background, migrating to more-strict churches.

(I think the latter fact should alarm all of us and make us question just how dead our spirituality really is, and also make us question just how justified we are in judging other Christians for being worldly.)
I agree. This is very concerning.
0 x
Josh

Re: Standards vs Reality

Post by Josh »

cmbl wrote:
Josh wrote:I wonder if anyone goes "up".
There are of course, NMB's who move "up". One conservative Mennonite I talked with commented on how sometimes they keep going until they get to the Old Order, then leave, saying that it's all form.
I should have clarified who I meant by "anyone". I meant, I wonder if any Mennonite-background people ever go "up". Of course, every single NMB is going "up".
0 x
Josh

Re: Standards vs Reality

Post by Josh »

Neto wrote:I know two brothers here in Holmes County who grew up Beachy AM, and joined the Old Order Amish.
I hope I do not sound exceedingly cynical, but did they marry into the church?
0 x
Josh

Re: Standards vs Reality

Post by Josh »

Hats Off wrote:What is an evangelical horse and buggy group, Stauffers? Orthodox?
Cory Anderson calls them "Lobelville, TN-type churches". They call themselves "Believers in Christ". Their theology is solidly evangelical conservative Anabaptism, as is their views of salvation, being born again, and so forth. Their practice is still very much horse and buggy, with a typical conservative Anabaptist approach to how to do that.
0 x
Post Reply