Interested in learning about Holdemans

[Ken]

There's also a difference between forfeiting one's church membership and being excommunicated. If a church requires its members to have permission from the ministers before marrying someone, and they proceed without that, it could well be they might forfeit their membership. This doesn't mean they are necessarily excommunicated.

I'm not sure I understand the difference between forfeit of membership and excommunication. Can you explain?

That said, this strikes me as one of the most significant differences between conservative groups like the Holdemans and more liberal groups like MCUSA. In my experience with MCUSA (which admittedly is a sample of one) I found it somewhat difficult to shed one's membership in a church. I left home for college at age 18 and never really returned because my parents also relocated soon after. I found out by chance over a decade later when I was in my 30s that I was still listed as a member of a church that I had not attended for perhaps 15 years since I was a HS senior and had long since ceased attending MCUSA churches. I asked someone about it and they said "well, we really don't take you off the list unless we get a request to transfer your membership to another church. OK then... I don't know if that was just this particular small church, or if I was granted some deference due to the fact that my family were founding members. But I found it a bit amusing and curious at the time. They had absolutely no idea who I was or what I was doing or believing yet still claimed me as a member.

By contrast it seems that conservative groups are much quicker to excommunicate at the drop of a hat for any number of possible reasons. Or perhaps take church membership much more seriously.

[Neto]

There's also a difference between forfeiting one's church membership and being excommunicated. If a church requires its members to have permission from the ministers before marrying someone, and they proceed without that, it could well be they might forfeit their membership. This doesn't mean they are necessarily excommunicated.

I'm not sure I understand the difference between forfeit of membership and excommunication. Can you explain?

That said, this strikes me as one of the most significant differences between conservative groups like the Holdemans and more liberal groups like MCUSA. In my experience with MCUSA (which admittedly is a sample of one) I found it somewhat difficult to shed one's membership in a church. I left home for college at age 18 and never really returned because my parents also relocated soon after. I found out by chance over a decade later when I was in my 30s that I was still listed as a member of a church that I had not attended for perhaps 15 years since I was a HS senior and had long since ceased attending MCUSA churches. I asked someone about it and they said "well, we really don't take you off the list unless we get a request to transfer your membership to another church. OK then... I don't know if that was just this particular small church, or if I was granted some deference due to the fact that my family were founding members. But I found it a bit amusing and curious at the time. They had absolutely no idea who I was or what I was doing or believing yet still claimed me as a member.

By contrast it seems that conservative groups are much quicker to excommunicate at the drop of a hat for any number of possible reasons. Or perhaps take church membership much more seriously.

In the MB (Mennonite Brethren) congregation where I grew up, if you moved away, they would contact you after about 6 months, asking how you are doing with finding a new home congregation. (They never contacted me about it, because we were involved in foreign missions, and kept in active contact with them. They were also supporting us through prayer & finances. When I finally DID ask to be released so that I could join our current congregation, the pastor at that time did say that they might drop the financial support, HOWEVER, they actually RAISED it!)

[ohio jones]

There's also a difference between forfeiting one's church membership and being excommunicated. If a church requires its members to have permission from the ministers before marrying someone, and they proceed without that, it could well be they might forfeit their membership. This doesn't mean they are necessarily excommunicated.

I'm not sure I understand the difference between forfeit of membership and excommunication. Can you explain?

I would consider excommunication a public disciplinary process in response to unrepentant sin, with a goal of restoration.

Forfeiting or withdrawing membership might not always be publicly announced; more of a recognition that one no longer meets the criteria for maintaining membership for whatever reason (not necessarily involving sin).

In my congregation, after not attending for several years someone would be considered inactive and not counted with the active membership. If they later resume involvement, they would not necessarily (depending on the time frame and circumstances) need to go through a formal process to again be considered a member.

[Ken]

There's also a difference between forfeiting one's church membership and being excommunicated. If a church requires its members to have permission from the ministers before marrying someone, and they proceed without that, it could well be they might forfeit their membership. This doesn't mean they are necessarily excommunicated.

I'm not sure I understand the difference between forfeit of membership and excommunication. Can you explain?

That said, this strikes me as one of the most significant differences between conservative groups like the Holdemans and more liberal groups like MCUSA. In my experience with MCUSA (which admittedly is a sample of one) I found it somewhat difficult to shed one's membership in a church. I left home for college at age 18 and never really returned because my parents also relocated soon after. I found out by chance over a decade later when I was in my 30s that I was still listed as a member of a church that I had not attended for perhaps 15 years since I was a HS senior and had long since ceased attending MCUSA churches. I asked someone about it and they said "well, we really don't take you off the list unless we get a request to transfer your membership to another church. OK then... I don't know if that was just this particular small church, or if I was granted some deference due to the fact that my family were founding members. But I found it a bit amusing and curious at the time. They had absolutely no idea who I was or what I was doing or believing yet still claimed me as a member.

By contrast it seems that conservative groups are much quicker to excommunicate at the drop of a hat for any number of possible reasons. Or perhaps take church membership much more seriously.

In the MB (Mennonite Brethren) congregation where I grew up, if you moved away, they would contact you after about 6 months, asking how you are doing with finding a new home congregation. (They never contacted me about it, because we were involved in foreign missions, and kept in active contact with them. They were also supporting us through prayer & finances. When I finally DID ask to be released so that I could join our current congregation, the pastor at that time did say that they might drop the financial support, HOWEVER, they actually RAISED it!)

At the time I was single and pretty itinerant, attending college, working over seas, attending grad school, working in Alaska. etc. Perhaps the church leaders knew that from word of mouth via my relatives and made allowances, I don't know. Some of them were my relatives I guess. But I certainly wasn't maintaining any kind of church contact. I think there are other churches like the Mormons and Catholics who are much the same. I would not be surprised if my wife was still listed on the roster of the Catholic church she attended in Santiago in her youth despite having left the country over 20 years ago.

[mike]

There's also a difference between forfeiting one's church membership and being excommunicated. If a church requires its members to have permission from the ministers before marrying someone, and they proceed without that, it could well be they might forfeit their membership. This doesn't mean they are necessarily excommunicated.

I'm not sure I understand the difference between forfeit of membership and excommunication. Can you explain?

I would consider excommunication a public disciplinary process in response to unrepentant sin, with a goal of restoration.

Forfeiting or withdrawing membership might not always be publicly announced; more of a recognition that one no longer meets the criteria for maintaining membership for whatever reason (not necessarily involving sin).

In my congregation, after not attending for several years someone would be considered inactive and not counted with the active membership. If they later resume involvement, they would not necessarily (depending on the time frame and circumstances) need to go through a formal process to again be considered a member.

Excommunication is a public rebuke, doing what the New Testament describes as turning someone over to Satan. Forfeiting or terminating someone's membership is simply formal recognition that the person is no longer a member of your congregation. Often like OJ says it is just a clerical sort of acknowledgement that this person is no longer abiding by their agreement with the congregation.

[Ken]

I'm not sure I understand the difference between forfeit of membership and excommunication. Can you explain?

I would consider excommunication a public disciplinary process in response to unrepentant sin, with a goal of restoration.

Forfeiting or withdrawing membership might not always be publicly announced; more of a recognition that one no longer meets the criteria for maintaining membership for whatever reason (not necessarily involving sin).

In my congregation, after not attending for several years someone would be considered inactive and not counted with the active membership. If they later resume involvement, they would not necessarily (depending on the time frame and circumstances) need to go through a formal process to again be considered a member.

Excommunication is a public rebuke, doing what the New Testament describes as turning someone over to Satan. Forfeiting or terminating someone's membership is simply formal recognition that the person is no longer a member of your congregation. Often like OJ says it is just a clerical sort of acknowledgement that this person is no longer abiding by their agreement with the congregation.

Interesting. Although I suspect in the example of a couple who have their membership revoked (but not excommunicated) for getting married without the permission of the bishop, the difference is not that meaningful. They are still going to be the subject of endless public gossip and discussion either way in any small church or church community.

And if the goal of excommunication is restoration, what is the goal in this case? Do they get divorced or annul their marriage? Do they seek permission after the fact? How does it get resolved?

[mike]

Excommunication is a public rebuke, doing what the New Testament describes as turning someone over to Satan. Forfeiting or terminating someone's membership is simply formal recognition that the person is no longer a member of your congregation. Often like OJ says it is just a clerical sort of acknowledgement that this person is no longer abiding by their agreement with the congregation.

Interesting. Although I suspect in the example of a couple who have their membership revoked (but not excommunicated) for getting married without the permission of the bishop, the difference is not that meaningful. They are still going to be the subject of endless public gossip and discussion either way in any small church or church community.

No. There is a very significant difference between excommunication (reserved for serious sins) and simply having your membership revoked for disagreeing with church leadership or church policy.

And if the goal of excommunication is restoration, what is the goal in this case? Do they get divorced or annul their marriage? Do they seek permission after the fact? How does it get resolved?

I've never seen someone excommunicated for getting married to somebody outside the church, so Josh would have to chime in here. I'm very interested in knowing the answer. Do Holdemans consider such a marriage valid, or would they ask their excommunicated member to divorce the spouse in order to return to the church?

[Soloist]

Excommunication is a public rebuke, doing what the New Testament describes as turning someone over to Satan. Forfeiting or terminating someone's membership is simply formal recognition that the person is no longer a member of your congregation. Often like OJ says it is just a clerical sort of acknowledgement that this person is no longer abiding by their agreement with the congregation.


No. There is a very significant difference between excommunication (reserved for serious sins) and simply having your membership revoked for disagreeing with church leadership or church policy.

I haven't found this to be true at my church. As a non-member I interacted with an excommunicated member not realizing they were excommunicated until later. The only difference between non-members and excommunicated members is if you could sing at nursing homes. I for one cater to the ban view of excommunication... its not just communion... No one I've heard of outside of maybe the Beachies actually reference turning someone over to satan.
Its a blessing a story I heard about a Holdeman who left the church, they came and sung under his window for several weeks and he came back. Seems like Mennonites sort of are apathetic about excommunicated and either don't care and still involve them in social activities or never attempts to show them they care.
There is a biblical basis for no social activity, but no biblical basis to not entreat them.

[ohio jones]

No one I've heard of outside of maybe the Beachies actually reference turning someone over to satan.

In my context it's very rare and very serious, but I have seen it done.

[steve-in-kville]

My only experience with discipline has been holding people back from lovefeast/communion, withholding the holy kiss and such like. Never seen membership taken unless someone wanted to be removed from the church roll.