Apostasy of the 1960s-Chester Weaver-Anabaptist Perspectives

[appleman2006]

I agree with this list OJ.

And while I understand the point Chester is trying to make is that if you start to drop certain ling held applications of teachings we have held on to that this is what happens I think his message will be lost on the target audience because what they see is the list above and they have already decided they want no more of that.
In other words rather than saying we do not want to become like them we should be saying what are we doing wrong and how can we get back to a better way of following Jesus.

[DrWojo]

I agree with this list OJ.

And while I understand the point Chester is trying to make is that if you start to drop certain ling held applications of teachings we have held on to that this is what happens I think his message will be lost on the target audience because what they see is the list above and they have already decided they want no more of that.
In other words rather than saying we do not want to become like them we should be saying what are we doing wrong and how can we get back to a better way of following Jesus.

So which takes priority — when conflicts arise, does following Jesus take priority, or being sure the Mennonite Tradition, Mennonite Practices; to sum it up in a phrase, make sure the Mennonite Identity has not been in any way threatened? Or was that the Authority of the Brand-Named Mennonite Church Conference or Fellowship or their ‘Ordained’ Ministering Body? Just raising these questions give me PTSD flashbacks. But thank Jesus He delivered me from all those bondages. I now focus on following Him and if that makes my identity similar to other Protestant Christians so be it.

[appleman2006]

I cannot "like" this post enough. As a linguist and a Bible translator, I understand that some words are very difficult to translate, and one cannot expect a one-word equivalent. But Ms. Izzie makes a very important point here - Very Few People Here Know German!. And I've talked with Amish men about this term (at least one minister), and they cannot explain it easily, either. Plus, it doesn't resonate with me (as a Dutch Mennonite) because the Dutch didn't use this term. They actually have a word that is obviously the same word ("gelatenheid"), but they use a different word, spelled two ways in the Dutch language: "lijdzaamheid", or "leijdzaamheid". (Another word is listed as a synonym: "berusting".)

But using a word in a foreign language to "explain" a doctrinal position is like "secret knowledge", and if a person is serious about communicating, one must find a word in the language being spoken.

I agree with you on this Neto. I have a theory as to why this word has stuck around as a German word and I think it is because it is generally portrayed as something that our OO brothers do better than us in holding on to. It is associated with times of old when the German language was the prominent language used by us.
But here is the thing. I am not sure that the way even the OO groups work this is even proper or true to our roots or to Biblical doctrine anymore.

More on that in a bit.

I prefer to use the term Brotherhood of the believers. Not sure that it holds quite the same meaning but I think it is close. It depicts to me at least the important need we all have for input from others. It recognizes that one of the ways God speaks to us is through the brotherhood. It also brings out the fact that within the brotherhood we are all equal before God and we do not "rule" over each other. Rather we speak into each other's lives because we sincerely love and care for their eternal soul as well as for the well being of them here and now.
Unfortunately I think this is the part that we as conservatives have got wrong. We have used the power of the brotherhood concept as a club to threaten and/or punish rather than as a staff to guide. Rather than truly listen to each other we make the opinions of some automatically more valid than others. And unfortunately over time, tradition at times even trumps the word of God or true care for our brother's need.

At least that is how I see it from my corner as I scurry back into it.

[Franklin]

1. Isolationism (sometimes a by-product of the splitting) that involves separating not only from The World but from other Christians with an attitude of superiority that looks a whole lot like prIde.
2. Bounded set vs. centered set thinking, uniformity vs. unity, prioritizing conservatism vs. Christocentrism, rule-based micro-orderliness vs. Spirit-led sometimes-slightly-messiness, however you want to frame that.

These are the things that I like about conservative Mennonites. I hate modern Christianity.

[Ms. Izzie]

I prefer to use the term Brotherhood of the believers. Not sure that it holds quite the same meaning but I think it is close. It depicts to me at least the important need we all have for input from others. It recognizes that one of the ways God speaks to us is through the brotherhood. It also brings out the fact that within the brotherhood we are all equal before God and we do not "rule" over each other. Rather we speak into each other's lives because we sincerely love and care for their eternal soul as well as for the well being of them here and now.
Unfortunately I think this is the part that we as conservatives have got wrong. We have used the power of the brotherhood concept as a club to threaten and/or punish rather than as a staff to guide. Rather than truly listen to each other we make the opinions of some automatically more valid than others. And unfortunately over time, tradition at times even trumps the word of God or true care for our brother's need.

The community life of Christians has the potential of being one of its greatest strengths and also its greatest weakness. I think the emphasis on community which is present in both liberal and conservative Mennonites is what is leading both groups away from Jesus and His teachings. We cannot depend on the group too much or we may forfeit our soul. Where are the healthy lines? I'm still learning, but I know some which I won't cross.

Having said this, I believe God has His people in many places and denominations across the world.

[Biblical Anabaptist]

I cannot "like" this post enough. As a linguist and a Bible translator, I understand that some words are very difficult to translate, and one cannot expect a one-word equivalent. But Ms. Izzie makes a very important point here - Very Few People Here Know German!. And I've talked with Amish men about this term (at least one minister), and they cannot explain it easily, either. Plus, it doesn't resonate with me (as a Dutch Mennonite) because the Dutch didn't use this term. They actually have a word that is obviously the same word ("gelatenheid"), but they use a different word, spelled two ways in the Dutch language: "lijdzaamheid", or "leijdzaamheid". (Another word is listed as a synonym: "berusting".)

But using a word in a foreign language to "explain" a doctrinal position is like "secret knowledge", and if a person is serious about communicating, one must find a word in the language being spoken.

I agree with you on this Neto. I have a theory as to why this word has stuck around as a German word and I think it is because it is generally portrayed as something that our OO brothers do better than us in holding on to. It is associated with times of old when the German language was the prominent language used by us.
But here is the thing. I am not sure that the way even the OO groups work this is even proper or true to our roots or to Biblical doctrine anymore.

More on that in a bit.

I prefer to use the term Brotherhood of the believers. Not sure that it holds quite the same meaning but I think it is close. It depicts to me at least the important need we all have for input from others. It recognizes that one of the ways God speaks to us is through the brotherhood. It also brings out the fact that within the brotherhood we are all equal before God and we do not "rule" over each other. Rather we speak into each other's lives because we sincerely love and care for their eternal soul as well as for the well being of them here and now.
Unfortunately I think this is the part that we as conservatives have got wrong. We have used the power of the brotherhood concept as a club to threaten and/or punish rather than as a staff to guide. Rather than truly listen to each other we make the opinions of some automatically more valid than others. And unfortunately over time, tradition at times even trumps the word of God or true care for our brother's need.

At least that is how I see it from my corner as I scurry back into it.

Much of Chester's frame of reference in his early years would have been in a conference type setting where it is a top-down rule. I don't know how a fellowship type church life operates 1st hand, but I believe at least in theory "gelassenheit" or "Brotherhood of Believers" would be more how a fellowship type church operates. The conference-type church government does lip service to "Brotherhood of Believers" but it seldom happens.

[Ms. Izzie]

The latest style of "brotherhood" is "head of household" meetings which has it's own tyrannical methods of getting rid of dissenters. Don't be fooled. If people aren't wired to love their brothers, there is no style of "brotherhood" that will overcome it.

[appleman2006]

The latest style of "brotherhood" is "head of household" meetings which has it's own tyrannical methods of getting rid of dissenters. Don't be fooled. If people aren't wired to love their brothers, there is no style of "brotherhood" that will overcome it.

Do not get me going on that. Men's meetings to decide church matters is so far away from true brotherhood IMO. That is a long way from what I am talking about.

[appleman2006]

I cannot "like" this post enough. As a linguist and a Bible translator, I understand that some words are very difficult to translate, and one cannot expect a one-word equivalent. But Ms. Izzie makes a very important point here - Very Few People Here Know German!. And I've talked with Amish men about this term (at least one minister), and they cannot explain it easily, either. Plus, it doesn't resonate with me (as a Dutch Mennonite) because the Dutch didn't use this term. They actually have a word that is obviously the same word ("gelatenheid"), but they use a different word, spelled two ways in the Dutch language: "lijdzaamheid", or "leijdzaamheid". (Another word is listed as a synonym: "berusting".)

But using a word in a foreign language to "explain" a doctrinal position is like "secret knowledge", and if a person is serious about communicating, one must find a word in the language being spoken.

I agree with you on this Neto. I have a theory as to why this word has stuck around as a German word and I think it is because it is generally portrayed as something that our OO brothers do better than us in holding on to. It is associated with times of old when the German language was the prominent language used by us.
But here is the thing. I am not sure that the way even the OO groups work this is even proper or true to our roots or to Biblical doctrine anymore.

More on that in a bit.

I prefer to use the term Brotherhood of the believers. Not sure that it holds quite the same meaning but I think it is close. It depicts to me at least the important need we all have for input from others. It recognizes that one of the ways God speaks to us is through the brotherhood. It also brings out the fact that within the brotherhood we are all equal before God and we do not "rule" over each other. Rather we speak into each other's lives because we sincerely love and care for their eternal soul as well as for the well being of them here and now.
Unfortunately I think this is the part that we as conservatives have got wrong. We have used the power of the brotherhood concept as a club to threaten and/or punish rather than as a staff to guide. Rather than truly listen to each other we make the opinions of some automatically more valid than others. And unfortunately over time, tradition at times even trumps the word of God or true care for our brother's need.

At least that is how I see it from my corner as I scurry back into it.

Much of Chester's frame of reference in his early years would have been in a conference type setting where it is a top-down rule. I don't know how a fellowship type church life operates 1st hand, but I believe at least in theory "gelassenheit" or "Brotherhood of Believers" would be more how a fellowship type church operates. The conference-type church government does lip service to "Brotherhood of Believers" but it seldom happens.

I gathered as much that his background was Lancaster conference and I am assuming he or his family broke away with the eastern and then Pilgrim if I was following his path. And he must be something in the line of Shippensberg fellowship now if I had to guess. And I would put his age at about 63 which would of made him almost a teenager at the time of the Eastern breakaway.

How close am I?

[PeterG]

As I recall, Chester's background is EPMC, and he's been part of a Beachy Amish church for at least a couple of decades. If any of you know differently, please correct me.