Interested in learning about Holdemans

[JohnH]

I just joined this chat. Found it interesting to find there’s a thread actively going about Holdeman Mennonites. I was actually raised that way. I would say much of what John has said would be the way I understood their belief. The only difference was I was taught there was a thread all the way from the apostles to the modern day that had been the one true church. I understood Menno Simons and Dirk Phillips also believed that way. However it’s been a long time ago that I learned about that in school so they may not teach that way anymore.

As I understand it, this viewpoint used to be common (the “succession” view), but died out after Vivian & Will Stoppel tried to write a book promoting such a view. They found problems finding a clean lineage particularly in the era of the Cathars (the same lineage pretty much every other non-Catholic succession will end up claiming). After this, a new view emerged of a “candlestick” view - that is, if the true church is extinguished due to falling into grave error, the Lord will light a new candlestick elsewhere and the true church will then be there.

Edit: I might add I kind of turned out to be a black sheep so take me with a grain of salt. I may be wrong. Been lately trying to understand what truth really is which is why I joined this chat. I didn’t really have a problem with the Holdeman’s just didn’t seem to be able to really live it as a youth.

Thanks for joining the forum; hope you find it interesting.

[Kenny1995]

John do you know any books other than John Holdeman’s who teach the one true church? I was reading in Martyrs Mirror earlier and it talks about the true church which maybe is considered the same thing. I’ve found several early church fathers who wrote about the true church and doctrines and things that will be found in it. Just wondered if you knew of anything more specific to that point.

[Ernie]

What do Holdeman's practice footwashing?

[Ernie]

I meant to say, "how"

[Soloist]

I don’t remember how but I don’t think it was that different.
I remember being told it was how they insured everyone was clean by ritualistically cleaning their feet and then there would be no sin in the camp.
Okay, the other two holdermen were jaw dropped at this guy’s explanation

[JohnH]

What do Holdeman's practice footwashing?

It is practiced at communion services. However, it is practiced with the ministers performing the footwashing, with the deacons assisting (or, for the women's side, the ministers' wives and the deacons' wives). I find the symbolism of this interesting since it makes out the ministers / the ministers' wives to be a type of Christ.

Are there any other Anabaptist groups that do this, as opposed to a "peer" based footwashing?

I don’t remember how but I don’t think it was that different.
I remember being told it was how they insured everyone was clean by ritualistically cleaning their feet and then there would be no sin in the camp.
Okay, the other two holdermen were jaw dropped at this guy’s explanation

That's... quite an explanation. As I recall from a communion service, we were taught that sometimes a Judas even had his feet washed and shared the Last Supper with Jesus, as a reminder that attending communion with sinful intent in our hearts won't wash us clean if we intend to deceive.

[JohnH]

John do you know any books other than John Holdeman’s who teach the one true church? I was reading in Martyrs Mirror earlier and it talks about the true church which maybe is considered the same thing. I’ve found several early church fathers who wrote about the true church and doctrines and things that will be found in it. Just wondered if you knew of anything more specific to that point.

Pilgram Marpeck talked a lot about the need for a visible church. Dirk Philips wrote extensively about the need for a visible and pure church, which is probably what inspired John Holdeman and John Herr. Claes Ganlof was another writer who made a much more direct appeal for a one, true, visible church, or as he called it, Von die einige Unzerteilte Gemeinde Gottes, "Of the one undivided church of God". You already mentioned the Martyrs' Mirror which is another primary source.

One "wrinkle" about this is that these early writers operated in a quite apocalyptic mode and were very much expecting either the Lord to come back soon or for themselves to be killed off in waves of persecution (which indeed some of them were). They didn't seem to give much thought to the organisational and institutional problems of trying to operate a "one true church" for multiple generations, and indeed the example of the Flemish/Frisian groups was one of frequent divisions, although I argue that the non-true church groups, such as the Swiss Brethren descended groups, seem to have figured out how to have frequent divisions as well.

[ken_sylvania]

John do you know any books other than John Holdeman’s who teach the one true church? I was reading in Martyrs Mirror earlier and it talks about the true church which maybe is considered the same thing. I’ve found several early church fathers who wrote about the true church and doctrines and things that will be found in it. Just wondered if you knew of anything more specific to that point.

Pilgram Marpeck talked a lot about the need for a visible church. Dirk Philips wrote extensively about the need for a visible and pure church, which is probably what inspired John Holdeman and John Herr. Claes Ganlof was another writer who made a much more direct appeal for a one, true, visible church, or as he called it, Von die einige Unzerteilte Gemeinde Gottes, "Of the one undivided church of God". You already mentioned the Martyrs' Mirror which is another primary source.

One "wrinkle" about this is that these early writers operated in a quite apocalyptic mode and were very much expecting either the Lord to come back soon or for themselves to be killed off in waves of persecution (which indeed some of them were). They didn't seem to give much thought to the organisational and institutional problems of trying to operate a "one true church" for multiple generations, and indeed the example of the Flemish/Frisian groups was one of frequent divisions, although I argue that the non-true church groups, such as the Swiss Brethren descended groups, seem to have figured out how to have frequent divisions as well.

The Swiss Brethren and their descendants believed a true, visible church. It doesn't seem accurate to call them "non-true" church groups, much as you would like to believe they are not true churches.

[JohnH]

The Swiss Brethren and their descendants believed a true, visible church. It doesn't seem accurate to call them "non-true" church groups, much as you would like to believe they are not true churches.

The Swiss and Dutch Anabaptist concepts were significantly differently, particularly around the concept of a "pure church".

[Judas Maccabeus]

The Swiss Brethren and their descendants believed a true, visible church. It doesn't seem accurate to call them "non-true" church groups, much as you would like to believe they are not true churches.

The Swiss and Dutch Anabaptist concepts were significantly differently, particularly around the concept of a "pure church".

I don't think they were all that different. None of the disperate groups that developed proclaimed themselfs the 'ONE TRUE VISAVLE CHURCH®."