Farewell MC-USA: Mosaic's Departure from the Denomination

[Szdfan]

We are opposed to violent coercion since it relies on the threat of killing people. Obviously some “coercion” is necessary. I would grab a child’s hand who runs into a street despite being told not to when cars are coming.

A fine is also not violent coercion. The state doesn't threaten to kill people for not paying their speeding tickets.

The penalty for traffic infractions here is a fine or 30 days imprisonment.

Not paying fines will eventually result in seizure of property and money and seizure of wages, so effectively servitude.

Okay, but that's not killing people. You defined "violent coercion" as the threat to kill people.

[Josh]

A fine is also not violent coercion. The state doesn't threaten to kill people for not paying their speeding tickets.

The penalty for traffic infractions here is a fine or 30 days imprisonment.

Not paying fines will eventually result in seizure of property and money and seizure of wages, so effectively servitude.

Okay, but that's not killing people. You defined "violent coercion" as the threat to kill people.

I consider forced servitude and slavery to be “violent coercion”, and indeed the carceral state is backed up by an implicit threat to use deadly force.

[temporal1]

P.5 / Coercion:

Here is an example of why I think using Marpeck as a role model for political involvement is a stretch and even unfair...

Klassen observes that:
Marpeck believed that the church must exist as a social structure in tension with the state. When it was suggested to him that a community which rejects the basis of power on which the state rests, in fact challenges the legitimacy of the state, he replied that obedience to God is more important than obedience to Caesar. Both he and his colleague Scharnschlager, held the position that even if Anabaptists were to become a majority, they would not force their faith on others.

Faith must come out of the willingness of the individual to accept it and coercion has no role in promoting faith.

Engaging in politics is forcing the minority to do what the majority wants done,*
and that is the exact opposite of what Marpeck believed and taught.

Someone should write an article about the moderate and progressive attempts at revisionist history, in which they make Marpeck out to be a supporter of their rightwing and leftwing political involvements.

“Coercion” is a key word. Worth thoughtfulness.

On MD, i had a light-bulb moment when reading Wayne’s words wrt government, “by force of the sword.”

That’s it.
Everything gov does, literally, is backed by force of the sword, the state, no matter how desirable, beneficial, necessary ..
whether jay-walking, sales tax, city utilities, ultimately, gov rules by force of the sword.

As for civil engineering and even railways .. i hate to break it to ya .. most of these great projects, definitely the Roman Roads, as example, were not built to serve households, the unemployed, widows+orphans, or any such. The biggest advances in human tech and medicine, come from needs of war, response to war. Also, profit, i.e., to serve industry, which is hard to separate from war.

It’s hard to be a purist on earth.

We ordinary people have become spoiled by so much comfort, choice, freedom and power in life, even literacy, i believe all this is a world historical anomaly. No guarantee it will last. So many seem to be rushing to give it away.

- - - - - - -

Ernie:
.. Engaging in politics is forcing the minority to do what the majority wants done,* ..

If i understand, this describes literal democracy, a word used frivolously and in strange ways today.

Those reciting “democracy, democracy” could exchange the words, “socialism, communism, Marxism” to be more honest/accurate.
Today’s dominant politics are fueled by politically ORGANIZED minorities, lobbies, billionaires, who have no margin of tolerance.
It’s not democracy. It is by force of the sword.

“Take heed.” They are “as serious as a heart attack,” as some might describe it.

- - - - - - -

(i believe) Christians are easily confused because Jesus Christ perfectly embodied social consciousness,
He did not conflate it with “by force of the sword.”

He could have! How efficient He could have been! He didn’t. We struggle.

imho, the human longing for EFFICIENCY is a false god.

This morning’s example of minority rule/ultimately, by force of the sword:

“It's not Mr., Mrs.... it's Mx?”
viewtopic.php?t=7130

No matter what the state is currently doing, everything it does is ultimately by force of the sword.
(History reflects it) Wayne summed it up correctly, “by force of the sword.”

[Ernie]

The County Engineer is sometimes an elected position and focuses on things like drainage, flooding, road repairs and so on.

If this position does not require the person to issue fines or help make laws punishable by fines or jail time, then I would be fine with a Christian having this position or even voting for someone to hold this position.

What's the difference between coercion from civil government and coercion from the church?

Coercion from civil government is forcing people to do things they don't want to do or never agreed to do, by issuing fines, putting liens on properties, putting people in prison, and other punishments.

The church is a voluntary religion that people can join if they wish, and can exit if they wish. If they decide against living a holy life like they agreed to do when they joined the church, they can leave. If they insist on sinning and refuse to leave, they may be disfellowshipped or excommunicated which means they can no longer enjoy the privileges of being part of the church. If after a person has been disfellowshipped and excommunicated, he or she insists on taking the bread and cup by force, when it is not offered to him, no non-resistant person is going to stand in the way of a person "stealing" the bread and the cup. The person just eats and drinks damnation to himself. The church does not force people to live holy lives. It is a volitional choice to do so.

This has not always been the case, but in most parts of the world in the 21st century, voluntary membership is the only way a person joins the church.

[Ernie]

How might a person be involved or engaged in civil politics in ways that do not involve coercion?

Why is it wrong to advise Caesar not to abuse this authority, to seek justice rather than injustice? You seem to be saying we cannot offer Caesar this advice because Caesar uses coercion. Is there something in the Bible that says that?

After writing on MD and MN for 18 years, how could you come to this conclusion?
I've often said that I think it is good and right for Christians to speak out against injustice and evil.

[Ernie]

How might a person be involved or engaged in civil politics in ways that do not involve coercion?

Town waterworks comes to mind. Although the billing manager might have to put liens on properties and shut off people’s water. I couldn’t do that.

Another would be the road repair crew - the majority of our township’s budget is for road repairs. The township hall and garage are right next to one of our church members who has a sizeable construction business. As I understand it, he has lent them equipment and other useful things when they needed it to help support the township’s work maintaining a great deal of roads. (Most the budget comes from a licence-plate fee of $15 per year which doesn’t seem too coercive.)

Ok. We must have different definitions in mind for the same terms.

I don't view being a janitor at a courthouse, or a teacher at a public school, or an engineer for the water department as engaging in civil politics.

I do view putting liens on properties, shutting off people's water, issuing fines, and being part of a governing body that oversees such laws as being involved in coercion and therefore being outside of the roles that Christians should be participating in. In my mind, the same is true for signing petitions, voting in elections, blocking roads during protests, etc.

The County Engineer is sometimes an elected position and focuses on things like drainage, flooding, road repairs and so on.

If this position does not require the person to issue fines or help make laws punishable by fines or jail time, then I would be fine with a Christian having this position or even voting for someone to hold this position.

joshuabgood, perhaps you can tell us why you quit being a school superintendent as it relates to this topic?

[Ernie]

Do you believe in abolishing the police, jails, courts, and rule of law?

Or do you just want only non-Christians to operate all of those things?

Only non-Christians.

I prefer non-Christians who respect Christians and their values to be in charge of civil matters as society will be better off. I know people involved in politics who are not Christians, yet understand that real Followers of Jesus do not need to be chastened with police, jails, courts, etc. They realize that these things are for those who don't follow Jesus. Yet, they are not ready to surrender to God themselves.

[Josh]

I couldn’t be a good jailer because I would not use violence to keep the prisoners in line and prevent escapes or punish a prisoner who tries to hurt or kill other prisoners. And id end up being unjust myself.