What defines you as conservative?

[AnthonyMartin]

Okay, this question is for those of you who consider yourself conservative. At a minimum this is a question for those who claim a two kingdom affiliation, head covering for women at the very least while praying or prophesying, permanence of marriage, modesty of dress as defined by the church in some way, not swearing of oaths, and non-resistant.

Why do you consider yourself conservative Christian? What is defining between you and liberal Christians? is it the bare minimum displayed above? or is there more specifics?

I’d qualify for all of the above, but I wouldn’t identify as conservative. I think it is a completely reactive term that has no meaning outside of context. The context is irrelevant to me. The definition of Christian to me is the desire to follow and imitate Christ.

[steve-in-kville]

Threads like this remind me of my wife's family gatherings: a diverse group of people, and each and every one thinks they're just a little bit better than the rest because they do or don't do certain things. Or go certain places. Or dress a certain way. Or my favorite, the women who tie their covering strings under their chin... that's next level spiritual right there!! Someone get this person a medal!!

(sorry... got a flair for the dramatic lately. Its the Irish in me )

[Ernie]

I think most conservatives look back to an era in the past whenever they believe a certain segment of the church was at its "golden age" in terms of faithfulness to God. There is much overlap between these various segments when it comes to conservatism, yet each one has its own specifics that is different from the rest.

Then there are a few who conservatives who look at what has been commonly understood and practiced through the centuries to determine what should be conserved today. I try to align with this group.

For me it is simply a hesitancy to change beliefs or eliminate practices that many believers/churches have kept historically - all the way back to the beginning.

I can get on board with Ernie's definition of slowness to abandon belief and practice of the early church, but that will not always be perceived as conserving or stabilizing society. In many cases it has been rejected as radical and destabilizing.

Just to clarify... I do not see the early church as The Golden Age and that we should pattern all things according to the early church model. Doctrine, yes. Practices, not necessarily.

[ken_sylvania]

Threads like this remind me of my wife's family gatherings: a diverse group of people, and each and every one thinks they're just a little bit better than the rest because they do or don't do certain things. Or go certain places. Or dress a certain way. Or my favorite, the women who tie their covering strings under their chin... that's next level spiritual right there!! Someone get this person a medal!!

(sorry... got a flair for the dramatic lately. Its the Irish in me )

Sure enough! All the way down to that one guy who thinks he's better than the others because he doesn't participate in the gossip and nit-picking! Sorry my friend, but I think you kind of asked for it.

[joshuabgood]

In my mind, in a real sense, we ought to transcend terms/ideologies like "conservatism/liberalism."

[steve-in-kville]

Threads like this remind me of my wife's family gatherings: a diverse group of people, and each and every one thinks they're just a little bit better than the rest because they do or don't do certain things. Or go certain places. Or dress a certain way. Or my favorite, the women who tie their covering strings under their chin... that's next level spiritual right there!! Someone get this person a medal!!

(sorry... got a flair for the dramatic lately. Its the Irish in me )

Sure enough! All the way down to that one guy who thinks he's better than the others because he doesn't participate in the gossip and nit-picking! Sorry my friend, but I think you kind of asked for it.

Told you I had a flair for the dramatic lately

[MaxPC]

Yet you have been taking jabs at people including Anabaptists in other forums too. Your affiliation says “wanderer” in Greek. Are you not affiliated with a fellowship?

Feel free to private message me any rebukes containing specifics, otherwise I'm at a loss for where my occasional quips crossed a line. I'll admit I can miss how I'm perceived sometimes, but generally speaking, I'm not intentionally jabbing.
I am affiliated but the Greek affiliates me better for who I am and where I am. I belong to one of the Conservative Mennonite fellowship's, the same that RZehr is in.

Thank you, Soloist: I will pm as needed. This exchange is also a good reminder to me to check the forum category in which the OP is posted. It does not always show clearly on my phone's browser. Normally I do not intrude into Anabaptist-only conversations but the phone creates a hindrance in that regard and I forget to check the category before response. You have my apologies for any confusion.

Nevertheless, the Anabaptist category is quite an enlightening and informative forum. I will continue to visit but urge all to feel free to limit the parameters to those sought for responses as a part of the OP. I will not be offended.

[Mayberry]

To Soloist’s question, “Does this covering look like a cap? or more like a Muslim covering?” I respond with a few of questions of my own:

Which style would better fit the scriptural definition as offered by Strong’s Greek … “to cover wholly, i.e. veil:—cover, hide”? By the way, generally speaking, the early Christian writers concluded that the face was not necessarily to be covered, yet I wonder upon what grounds I would argue against it. No, I do not personally know of any women who cover their face.

Which style, cap or hanging veil, would seem to match even the traditional Catholic veil worn even in the ancient imagery of the Virgin Mary? I am not promoting Roman Catholicism here, but history seems to say something here.

An interesting Christian head covering link provided by a most worldly source might be https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Christian_head_covering .

Why is the cap commonly referred to as the “Pennsylvania cap?” Did those Anabaptist sisters in Europe suffering persecution parade around in a Pennsylvania style cap? Or was the Pennsylvania cap style some sort of unique expression on the part of those welcomed to PA by William Penn?

I must wonder where the “Muslim covering” found its roots, especially since this religion appeared something like 600 years after Christianity. Could it, somehow, have been an expression witnessed among Christians by Muslim women? After all, I understand that Jesus is mentioned in the Koran in a positive way some 25 times .

I wonder how many have come across sisters in the faith who wear a “veil of size” (not a cap, a full veil). We personally know Baptist women in our area who wear a full hanging veil, some “traditional” Catholic women (all day, not just in church services), and a good number of unaffiliated Anabaptist sisters—all reasonably nearby. It is seen as a headship symbol, not just a prayertime veiling. We once visited the Three Rivers Christian Brotherhood group in Michigan. All the sisters wore a solid color veil that came at least to their back, some much longer. All sisters wear it all the time. I was told they are somehow affiliated with similar Anabaptist churches in several other states. None were to be confused as being Muslim.

Then Solist writes:
“Why do you accept internet Mayberry? as for the clothing, if you no longer would be conservative Mennonite, would you accept someone who wore a tunic for Sunday rather than a white shirt? “

“… if you no longer would be conservative Mennonite …” You are correct that I would no longer identify as a Mennonite, per se, yet I am definitely conservative Anabaptist in my thinking.

Internet: My first introduction to the conservative Anabaptist world was by every reference catalog “Old Order Mennonite.” When I first attended, they declared the Internet to be totally evil. However, after a number of years lucre nudged such thinking, and Internet for busine$$ was allowed. Then Internet with guards and filters quietly emerged, then smartphones with filters. There is no conversation about such things, yet they clearly exist. At this present time, the New Order Amish in my area have cell phones, and some businesses limited Internet. Old Order Amish tend to pay someone else to actually own the phone to “officially” do their business. Why am I being singled out for accepting the Internet, even with many safeguards in place? No response is needed. I am comfortable with my decision, and my closest brothers in the faith are as well.

Soloist writes: “as for the clothing, if you no longer would be conservative Mennonite, would you accept someone who wore a tunic for Sunday rather than a white shirt?”

Tunic? If you a mean plain suit, the answer is yes, and I do. I might wonder what message the wearer is actually trying send, or perhaps he is merely expressing tradition. If a lapel type suit should be worn, I would probably raise my eyebrows a bit.

If you mean a true tunic, I have encountered an individual on a few occasions that wears a real tunic as he visits a conservative Anabaptist congregation. His heart seems to be in the right place, but his insistence upon wearing a classic tunic seems to me to be some sort of “look at me” thing. Maybe after time I will be able to better judge rightly.

As a side note, there is an interesting publication on modesty for sisters found at https://www.pilgrimministry.org/literat ... -bathsheba .

Yes, Soloist, in the opinion of my brothers in the faith, I am free to visit the Pilgrim site. Also, feel free to try https://www.anabaptistresources.org/



Thanks for your time. I am finished, and see no purpose in pursuing this topic.

[Neto]

Threads like this remind me of my wife's family gatherings....

Reminds me of when I first decided to "go conservative". I shaved off my mustache and 'soul patch', leaving only the beard. I didn't know enough about 'Plain People' at the time to know that only solid color shirts were 'kosher', so I just kept up with the button shirts I had always worn. (And speaking of the color of men's shirts, both of my grandpas only wore light blue shirts to services. White shirts were considered worldly, a mark of pride.) But anyway, I got so tired of people I'd meet accusing me of being a legalist (because I was living by a set of guidelines, or 'rules') that I just started introducing myself as "Hi, I'm ----. I'm a legalist." Then they were off-guard to start with, and wanted to help me by showing me that I wasn't really a 'legalist'. They would ask deeper more probing questions, and by the end of even the first conversation they'd be arguing that I wasn't really a legalist. (Funny how that works.... Label just really aren't that helpful - in my opinion.)

[Soloist]

I must wonder where the “Muslim covering” found its roots, especially since this religion appeared something like 600 years after Christianity. Could it, somehow, have been an expression witnessed among Christians by Muslim women? After all, I understand that Jesus is mentioned in the Koran in a positive way some 25 times .

I did mean an actual tunic not a plain suit. As for the Muslim covering, it seems like the Arabs actually wore a covering even covering the face. See Tertullian's arguments on head coverings. This would predate the rise of the Muslim empire. In fact most of the Muslim practices were already being used to some degree as worship of various gods and were formulated much later into what we see today but that's really a bunny trail.