Mainline/Mainstream Anabaptists

[Nomad]

I agree. I don't really find graphs/ charts about categorizing different people into neat little groups very helpful. Typically, its all based on one individuals own perception without taking into account the diversity of the individuals within the group they are labeling. Everybody is different within each group and not everybody fits in the neat little box we put them in.

If people think its helpful...that's fine...but its not really that beneficial and is a waste of time in my opinion.

This is a viewpoint I tend to hear from people with certain affiliations/part of certain groups.

Digging into things a bit deeper, I can say with confidence that "a defining characteristic of Old Order Amish is that they use horse and buggy and don't drive cars. A defining characteristic of Conservative Mennonites is that they do use cars and don't rely on horse and buggy."

Is there something you find offensive about a statement like that? It is not actually true that "Everybody is different within each group and not everybody fits in the little box we put them in" with regards to cars; if you go to a conservative Mennonite congregation, virtually everyone will be driving a car and nobody will be using horse and buggy. If you go to an Old Order Amish congregation, nobody will be driving a car. There is no "diversity" of individuals in this matter.

Usually the classifications made to label a group are more vague than the one you gave. But if your just wanting to label which splinter group of Anabaptist are "car driving Anabaptist" vs "non car driving Anabaptist" for research purposes, I dont see any harm in that. However, more times than not the judgements made by a person classifying a group is made in a negative light or they are making statements about a group that they "heard" from a few individuals within said group and then have assumed their view on the rest of the individuals. A few people within one classified group doesn't speak for the collective group. There may not be diversity within a group on everything...but I guarantee there is still some diversity.

[JohnH]

Usually the classifications made to label a group are more vague than the one you gave. But if your just wanting to label which splinter group of Anabaptist are "car driving Anabaptist" vs "non car driving Anabaptist" for research purposes, I dont see any harm in that. However, more times than not the judgements made by a person classifying a group is made in a negative light or they are making statements about a group that they "heard" from a few individuals within said group and then have assumed their view on the rest of the individuals. A few people within one classified group doesn't speak for the collective group. There may not be diversity within a group on everything...but I guarantee there is still some diversity.

Are you part of any Anabaptist group?

[Nomad]

Usually the classifications made to label a group are more vague than the one you gave. But if your just wanting to label which splinter group of Anabaptist are "car driving Anabaptist" vs "non car driving Anabaptist" for research purposes, I dont see any harm in that. However, more times than not the judgements made by a person classifying a group is made in a negative light or they are making statements about a group that they "heard" from a few individuals within said group and then have assumed their view on the rest of the individuals. A few people within one classified group doesn't speak for the collective group. There may not be diversity within a group on everything...but I guarantee there is still some diversity.

Are you part of any Anabaptist group?

Yep!

[JohnH]

Usually the classifications made to label a group are more vague than the one you gave. But if your just wanting to label which splinter group of Anabaptist are "car driving Anabaptist" vs "non car driving Anabaptist" for research purposes, I dont see any harm in that. However, more times than not the judgements made by a person classifying a group is made in a negative light or they are making statements about a group that they "heard" from a few individuals within said group and then have assumed their view on the rest of the individuals. A few people within one classified group doesn't speak for the collective group. There may not be diversity within a group on everything...but I guarantee there is still some diversity.

Are you part of any Anabaptist group?

Yep!

Dare I ask what affiliation?

[Nomad]

Are you part of any Anabaptist group?

Yep!

Dare I ask what affiliation?

I dont want you to assume who I am based on the group I associate with. Or worse...assume my view upon them. So I think I'll keep it quiet for now.

[R7ehr]

A few people within one classified group doesn't speak for the collective group. There may not be diversity within a group on everything...but I guarantee there is still some diversity.

Some people go so far as to decide on their own that they can issue apologies on behalf of others barely in their large group.

[Ken]

A few people within one classified group doesn't speak for the collective group. There may not be diversity within a group on everything...but I guarantee there is still some diversity.

I think this is especially true of groups in which membership is largely inherited (i.e. that you are born into). I've encountered plenty of people (and am related to some) who are mostly members of a particular group just because it is the path of least resistance and easiest to just go with the flow when most of your family and social group are part of that group. Even if you personally don't agree or hold to all of the beliefs or restrictions of that group.

[JohnH]

I dont want you to assume who I am based on the group I associate with. Or worse...assume my view upon them. So I think I'll keep it quiet for now.

But if group affiliation is unimportant.. why not share it? What's the big deal?

[Nomad]

I dont want you to assume who I am based on the group I associate with. Or worse...assume my view upon them. So I think I'll keep it quiet for now.

But if group affiliation is unimportant.. why not share it? What's the big deal?

So your saying I have 2 choices...

Category 1) If I answer who I worship with, that shows that I think affiliation doesn't matter.

Category 2) If I don't answer then that has to mean I do think it matters.

Is that the 2 categories I have to chose between in order for you label me correctly?

[JohnH]

I dont want you to assume who I am based on the group I associate with. Or worse...assume my view upon them. So I think I'll keep it quiet for now.

But if group affiliation is unimportant.. why not share it? What's the big deal?

So your saying I have 2 choices...

Category 1) If I answer who I worship with, that shows that I think affiliation doesn't matter.

Category 2) If I don't answer then that has to mean I do think it matters.

Is that the 2 categories I have to chose between in order for you label me correctly?

I mean, if it's a big deal to keep your affiliation secret... then it must matter quite a bit to you.