DrWojo wrote:
The whole point I’m trying to make is to get Plain folks to think about the message they leave without speaking any words. In particular, the message that fellow Christians find offensive.
I think it doesn’t take hand on heart to show respect.
DrWojo wrote:
I probably didn’t fully realize this until I moved to Oklahoma. I was visiting with a deacon of a Pentecostal Holiness Church who shared with me his experience when a local Mennonite Church sent their children to the Holiness school and asked whether the Holiness would remove their flag from the stage for graduation because the Mennonites find it offensive? The Holiness Deacon proceeded to tell me of his relatives who died in service of the USA, “that these jokers can disrespect their service.” He further informed me that if he had a supply of small flags he would not have hesitated to break into the Mennonite Church and drill small holes on the end of every church bench and place flags there. (I don’t doubt for a minute that he would have) Also, I don’t want to be making up any stories, but I’m fairly certain that years ago there was a Pacifistic Church that started in Oklahoma and was burned by the locals in the community because it did not have a US flag in it and eventually the church did keep one in it to prevent having it be burned.
What was your response to him?
Did you exhort him to at least show respect for others beliefs, as you ask us to do? Was your response the same had a Mennonite told you they wanted to break into someone’s church and steal flags? Or is that different? Their ancestors died for the flag, ours have been killed by the flag.
What was your response to him?
It obviously was not a good plan to ask them to remove the flag. I’m surprised they did. When we rent large churches for big events, we leave their flags alone.
Interestingly enough, I also visited with a man this week who grew up Pentecostal, and he asked me about the pledge of allegiance and the flag. He told me that he grew up doing it all, very patriotic family in ranching country here, and him and his wife together have begun to question the appropriateness of the pledge. He says they think their allegiance should be to God. He has also stopped carrying his handgun. He said he would stand but not say the pledge.
Maybe war memorials and Arlington are places Mennonites should avoid. What business do we have going there if it is going to cause conflict?
We’re currently traveling and the reception is spotty, so instead of a nice post with bolded and colored print, all the comments will have to be here at the end of your post.
First question, you mentioned your ancestors were killed by the flag. Would you please explain that statement to me?
I agree with your sentiment it was not a good plan for the Mennonites to request the removal of the flag, especially since these Mennonites literally ‘wet-backed’ it here to Oklahoma from Mexico not too many years ago.
My response to the deacon began by actually assuring him that I was embarrassed by the disrespect and lack of upholding our country’s immigration laws displayed by the Mennonites he was discussing. The next issue was not so easy to answer. Did I think his relatives who died in war are in hell? I told him I’m happy to leave that with the Judge of all the earth that shall do right.
0 x
"Too often believers have trivialized goodness by concentrating on their various denominational brands of legalism, becoming a 'peculiar people' set at odd angles to the world rather than being an attractive light illuminating it." -Unknown
Christians have been killed by national governments as far back as Jesus. Flags represents nations. We just don’t get real enthusiastic about patriotism.
You already know the traditional stand we take and understand how we view our relationship with governments and nations, so I won’t get into that here.
But perhaps that deacon did not know our history, and our relationship with patriotism and persecution and you could have enlightened him. You called out your family for how they were at Arlington. Yet did you keep silent when someone is talking about breaking in and vandalizing a church because of a simple request? Why the difference? One is significantly more problematic than the other. This type of vandalism happened to one of our churches in Oregon during one of the wars in the past. Painting & shooting them.
AnthonyMartin wrote:
I believe that your statement is misleading and in some ways incorrect. To argue that sacrifice made by many is a myth and did nothing to provide the current freedoms seems totally false to me. To argue that such war and sacrifice is the only way to achieve these freedoms would also seem incorrect to me. Whether or not you can endorse the methods of war does not seem to diminish the fact that it was a means successfully used for the results we currently enjoy.
Name one freedom that we in the US enjoy because of war. I can think of none. I am open to being enlightened on this.
I was thinking mostly about the rebellion in the late 1700s and partly the civil war in the late 1800s. I'm not saying there wouldn't have been another way, but the amazing blessings of resources and freedoms exist with those wars as the means of provision. I suppose your opinion could differ but I don't see another reasonable option.
I am not trying to be argumentive - I am trying to understand. What particular freedom(s) do you enjoy because of either of these wars?
We probably enjoy more freedoms as a result of the lives that were lost by the Anabaptists during and after the reformation than from any war that was fought since 1500.
So you don't see the bill of rights being brought about by a war? Freedom of speech would be one in my opinion. War was the means used to provide and protect that freedom.
I would agree with you on the greater impact by non-violent sacrificial approaches by those martyred. maybe even more so the early Christians.
Last edited by AnthonyMartin on Sat Nov 23, 2019 5:58 pm, edited 1 time in total.
RZehr wrote:Christians have been killed by national governments as far back as Jesus. Flags represents nations. We just don’t get real enthusiastic about patriotism.
You already know the traditional stand we take and understand how we view our relationship with governments and nations, so I won’t get into that here.
But perhaps that deacon did not know our history, and our relationship with patriotism and persecution and you could have enlightened him. You called out your family for how they were at Arlington. Yet did you keep silent when someone is talking about breaking in and vandalizing a church because of a simple request? Why the difference? One is significantly more problematic than the other. This type of vandalism happened to one of our churches in Oregon during one of the wars in the past. Painting & shooting them.
I’m not saying that I could have done better in what I said or didn’t say to the Holiness deacon. I knew at the time he shared with me the Mennonites requesting that he remove the flag for graduation happened some years before. What I maybe didn’t make clear in my posts was the fact that a few Mennonite school children were actually attending a Holiness-run Christian Day School. I marvel more at the fact the Holiness people were more gracious in continuing to allow the Mennonites to send to their school for a number of years after that incident happened, which is not the way Mennonites typically treat outsiders desiring to send to their Christian Day Schools.
0 x
"Too often believers have trivialized goodness by concentrating on their various denominational brands of legalism, becoming a 'peculiar people' set at odd angles to the world rather than being an attractive light illuminating it." -Unknown
AnthonyMartin wrote:So you don't see the bill of rights being brought about by a war? Freedom of speech would be one in my opinion. War was the means used to provide and protect that freedom.
I would agree with you on the greater impact by non-violent sacrificial approaches by those martyred. maybe even more so the early Christians.
As much as I appreciate the Bill of Rights, I am not sure that while it came after the Revolutionary War it was necessarily a result of the war.
Appleman can correct me if I am wrong, but I believe Canada enjoys much the same freedom as the US without fighting a war against England.
Biblical Anabaptist wrote:
I think (correct me if I am wrong) the whole idea of us "enjoying freedoms" because of the sacrifices made by many is a myth perpetuated by those who are trying to incite young men (and women) to march off into war and kill their fellow men.
I believe that your statement is misleading and in some ways incorrect. To argue that sacrifice made by many is a myth and did nothing to provide the current freedoms seems totally false to me. To argue that such war and sacrifice is the only way to achieve these freedoms would also seem incorrect to me. Whether or not you can endorse the methods of war does not seem to diminish the fact that it was a means successfully used for the results we currently enjoy.
Name one freedom that we in the US enjoy because of war. I can think of none. I am open to being enlightened on this.
The Civil War freed the blacks from slavery. It's doubtful we would enjoy many freedoms had the Axis powers prevailed in World War II.
appleman2006 wrote: BTW I stand when our national anthem is sung out of respect. Sometimes I even sing and justify it in that standing on guard for my country means something very different to me. I do it by praying for our leaders and obeying where ever I can. I very seldom remove my hat though. As I almost never wear one.
I generally stand respectfully as well, hands at my side. Don't sing or recite the pledge. I have at times remained seated when I felt the tone of the moment was especially militant or idolatrous (including in a patriotic church setting or two).
I sometimes stay seated in an attitude of prayer and take this as a reminder to pray for our country. I think this might be a satisfactory explanation to many, that I am taking the time to pray for the USA.
QuietObserver wrote:The Civil War freed the blacks from slavery. It's doubtful we would enjoy many freedoms had the Axis powers prevailed in World War II.
That has been a subject of debate for many years. Some claim Lincoln was in favor of slavery. The industrial revolution would probably have eventually freed the slaves without the loss of over 1/2 million lives.
QuietObserver wrote:The Civil War freed the blacks from slavery. It's doubtful we would enjoy many freedoms had the Axis powers prevailed in World War II.
That has been a subject of debate for many years. Some claim Lincoln was in favor of slavery. The industrial revolution would probably have eventually freed the slaves without the loss of over 1/2 million lives.
Some also claim the earth is flat.
If one reads what Lincoln wrote about slavery it's rather difficult to conclude that he favored the institution.
That being said I don't disagree with your larger point - I'm not convinced the civil war was the only way slavery could have been eliminated from the US.
