appleman2006 wrote: ↑Tue Jul 27, 2021 4:10 pm If that is the type of thinking that is being propagated in CM circles then perhaps a bit of sarcasm is needed to wake us up. There is nothing funny about that. It literally IMO shows the workings of a reprobate mind, I am sorry. It just really made me angry.
It is the reality some of us grew up with. I'd say Cory might be on the extreme end, but the rest of By Thy Words? That's the stuff our church periodicals had in them. Oh, and God help you if you suggested supplementing the approved periodicals with something different.
Again I am sorry. I really am. But what worries me even more is how much of this type of thinking is slipping into some of our own circles.
The person running the FB group has had years of significant exposure to writing by Anabaptist publishers and has seen the effects the acceptance of wrong ideas promoted in some of these writings have had in the CA world. They started the group as a way of calling out writing that is harmful, and often use blunt, sharply worded sarcasm as a tool to do so. They've remained anonymous because of their connections in and appreciation for the CA world and so they can focus on debunking wrong ideas instead of being written off as a bitter ex-CA if people knew who they are (they're still in a relatively conservative Anabaptist congregation). In general, the MO of the group is "Enough Already!" and the FB group is focused on posts exposing and refuting wrong ideas, not necessarily on how to heal from and repair the harm caused by those ideas. This focus can make the comments fairly volatile.
All of that to say I think the work they're doing has a place no matter how imperfect, reactionary, and abrasive it may come across as being. The type of thinking they're exposing is in fact being propagated in CA circles, and as appleman stated: "perhaps a bit of sarcasm is needed to wake us up. There is nothing funny about that. It literally IMO shows the workings of a reprobate mind . . ." Exactly!
There are significant distinctions as well as some similarities between what C. Anderson has published and what most CA publishers publish (i.e. church periodicals as noted by Signtist) on a regular basis. Finding a way to take a stand against what is wrong in any/all of those writings is a messy and precarious endeavor, but an important one. It's possible to be aware of what is wrong with the approach of and responses within the FB group and at the same time avoid trying to cancel it as being without merit.
appleman2006 wrote: ↑Wed Jul 28, 2021 1:07 pm
Again I am sorry. I really am. But what worries me even more is how much of this type of thinking is slipping into some of our own circles.
Look where "our circles" came from. We bring ourselves with us, annoying as that is. I mean, you might be a charter member, but many of us are not.
yes well. The sad fact is that I am not sure even "charter members" are totally free from some of this thinking.
appleman2006 wrote: ↑Wed Jul 28, 2021 1:07 pm
Again I am sorry. I really am. But what worries me even more is how much of this type of thinking is slipping into some of our own circles.
Look where "our circles" came from. We bring ourselves with us, annoying as that is. I mean, you might be a charter member, but many of us are not.
yes well. The sad fact is that I am not sure even "charter members" are totally free from some of this thinking.
What puzzles me is how it’s just taken for granted that being more worldly/liberal is somehow an improvement.
Maybe you don’t have much contact with worldly people — but for most of them the situation they are in is much worse than the caricatures some people are complaining about in very conservative groups.
Signtist wrote: ↑Wed Jul 28, 2021 1:27 pm
Look where "our circles" came from. We bring ourselves with us, annoying as that is. I mean, you might be a charter member, but many of us are not.
yes well. The sad fact is that I am not sure even "charter members" are totally free from some of this thinking.
What puzzles me is how it’s just taken for granted that being more worldly/liberal is somehow an improvement.
Maybe you don’t have much contact with worldly people — but for most of them the situation they are in is much worse than the caricatures some people are complaining about in very conservative groups.
nope never said that. If I thought that I would have left a long time ago. But nor am I falling for the old " we sure are not as bad as those guys so we must be alright. "
this site as I understand it was initially set up as a place for conservative Mennonites to talk about issues that pertain to them. The day I do not care about us anymore is the day I will stop talking about our faults.
appleman2006 wrote: ↑Wed Jul 28, 2021 1:07 pm
Again I am sorry. I really am. But what worries me even more is how much of this type of thinking is slipping into some of our own circles.
Look where "our circles" came from. We bring ourselves with us, annoying as that is. I mean, you might be a charter member, but many of us are not.
yes well. The sad fact is that I am not sure even "charter members" are totally free from some of this thinking.
Being let down by trusted leadership doesn't seem to get easier with age?
Off hand I appreciate most of the Nationwide publications. Some of them are pretty funny but all seem reasonably sound. I guess I'm one of those "ultra" conservatives ya'll dislike. While I would disagree to the extent Cory might be taking, I would be very cautious to condemn him and his different idea's.
Mocking these publications and distorting it or pulling out unintended meanings from the writings and then expecting that I applaud their bravery? I'm more likely to pitch it and ignore it as propaganda rather then truth. Perhaps if they analyzed the doctrines presented in a balanced way and expressed their concerns I would be inclined to listen to it and consider it, but this method of coming across just simply has me toss it in the trash and ignore it as typical anti-Mennonite sentiment. Some of the conversations from people in this thread have suggested very un-conservative positions in the past and generally disagree with the broad conservative groups. Things like "its not ever the woman's fault" "it doesn't matter what you wear" While I would not say that the majority of abuse is ever the woman's fault, it does matter what you wear and how you behave. This is what I object to being pushed. Obviously what conservative is, is in question and I don't want to be in your conservative groups and would rather be part of a group that believes clothing and poses actually do matter and communicate.
Feel free to pick one of the examples, post the copy and explain why you believe it presents wrong think or dangerous doctrines. Otherwise its trash not worthy to read as mocking is condemned in Scripture and Paul reasoned with people who talked to him. He didn't mock different idea's in fact he directly referenced the baptism for the dead which I have never seen any group outside of the Mormons practice.
yes well. The sad fact is that I am not sure even "charter members" are totally free from some of this thinking.
What puzzles me is how it’s just taken for granted that being more worldly/liberal is somehow an improvement.
Maybe you don’t have much contact with worldly people — but for most of them the situation they are in is much worse than the caricatures some people are complaining about in very conservative groups.
nope never said that. If I thought that I would have left a long time ago. But nor am I falling for the old " we sure are not as bad as those guys so we must be alright. "
this site as I understand it was initially set up as a place for conservative Mennonites to talk about issues that pertain to them. The day I do not care about us anymore is the day I will stop talking about our faults.
The majority of the posts here are from ex-conservatives, liberals, and then myself - who knows if I am a “conservative Mennonite”.
Most of the discussions lately seem to be bashing conservative Mennonitism.
Soloist wrote: ↑Wed Jul 28, 2021 2:19 pm
Off hand I appreciate most of the Nationwide publications. Some of them are pretty funny but all seem reasonably sound. I guess I'm one of those "ultra" conservatives ya'll dislike. While I would disagree to the extent Cory might be taking, I would be very cautious to condemn him and his different idea's.
Mocking these publications and distorting it or pulling out unintended meanings from the writings and then expecting that I applaud their bravery? I'm more likely to pitch it and ignore it as propaganda rather then truth. Perhaps if they analyzed the doctrines presented in a balanced way and expressed their concerns I would be inclined to listen to it and consider it, but this method of coming across just simply has me toss it in the trash and ignore it as typical anti-Mennonite sentiment. Some of the conversations from people in this thread have suggested very un-conservative positions in the past and generally disagree with the broad conservative groups. Things like "its not ever the woman's fault" "it doesn't matter what you wear" While I would not say that the majority of abuse is ever the woman's fault, it does matter what you wear and how you behave. This is what I object to being pushed. Obviously what conservative is, is in question and I don't want to be in your conservative groups and would rather be part of a group that believes clothing and poses actually do matter and communicate.
Feel free to pick one of the examples, post the copy and explain why you believe it presents wrong think or dangerous doctrines. Otherwise its trash not worthy to read as mocking is condemned in Scripture and Paul reasoned with people who talked to him. He didn't mock different idea's in fact he directly referenced the baptism for the dead which I have never seen any group outside of the Mormons practice.
My Nationwide friends are wonderful, I enjoy talking to them. And I have no desire to mock or slander them. I also have no desire to mock or slander Anderson. Where I, Anderson, my Nationwide friends, or you are wrong in our thinking, we should be open to having those things challenged. Challenging and disputing someone's ideas can be done in a way that doesn't slander them.
You asked for an example of wrong thinking from C. Anderson's book. Here's one from page 90:
"Large flowers are also a much more forward statement of fertility. Just as the large flower in the garden attracts the bees, so do large flowers on dresses catch the eye."
Teaching people (especially young men) to look at a large flower and think of it as a symbol of fertility is a messed up way to look at something God created. Anyone should be able to look at a flower whether it shows up in nature, a painting, or on a dress and say: "Wow, that's a beautiful flower." Not: "Oh, a sign of fertility." That view cheapens and perverts what God has created and our creative expressive (photos/paintings etc) of God's creation.
Why the continued mentioned of Nationwide? I've not seen anything in our years of Rod and Staff books, Christian Contender, Sunday School booklets, and etc. of the things you all speak of. And the references I glanced at from By Thy Words were EPMC - not Nationwide. Are many of you referencing older books that are not even in publication anymore? - like I say I have bookshelves of Nationwide books and am yet to come across even one of these grievances. Was this an issue in the past that has been righted and bitterness just won't let go?
Cory Anderson promotes Beachyism as he understands it, not Nationwide. Nationwide people tend to wear prints (at least they do around here). Beachy people don’t (at least around here).
You should open your mind at least to the possibility he could be right that we shouldn’t adorn ourselves with complex prints of large, bright designs from nature. Instead of just immediately reacting and calling him a pervert. Whatever you think about Dr Anderson, he doesn’t have a whirlwind of accusations around him as unfortunately many others do in our CA circles. He mostly keeps to himself or spends time in worldly institutions.