It's fine to be a governor, as long as you are a Democrat

[PetrChelcicky]

Some replies to my critics:

1. If "Anabaptist World" reports about this, it is definitely a matter of "Anabaptist practice" (not only of "politics").

2. My attribute "fawning" in particular refers to the headline "Former S.D. governor lived out lessons for high school government classes". What is meant with that strange "lived out lessons"? That he was moved by the noble unselfish motive to practice what he had been teaching? The article does not even try to confirm this.

3. Progressive Mennonites have no qualms with using political power - I'm quite prepared to believe that, Ken does not need not to convince me. My argument is that progressive Mennonites feign a distance from the state when they want to have an effect on conservative Mennonites.
Here I refer to the declaration against Mastriano subscribed by 77 Mennonite clergypersons in Pa. (https://anabaptistworld.org/christian-n ... ued-in-pa/). I couldn't get the exact wording (can't get it in Germany for whatever reason), but in the sympathetic presentation by "Anabaptist World" the declaration culminates in the well-worn catchphrase that "Jesus' kingdom is not of this world".
I don't pretend that I understand this very obscure formula. But in the present context it seems to mean that it is inappropriate to give Christian motives or reasons for your political agenda. At least for conservatives. Whereas I never have observed any such misgivings when progressives advanced Christian motives or reasons for their political agenda. And that's what I call double standards ...

[Bootstrap]

LOL. What does the far left LGBTQ and abortion fear from the far right? Let’s not be ignorant. These extremes have zero tolerance for each other, they hate each other.
Laws. Dictation. Fines, confiscation, cancellation, imprisonment.

Sure, but I would hope that Mennonites and other Christians are neither the far left nor the far right.

And FWIW, I don't think most Americans are, either.

Religious persecution. They hate the Christian right, and to them, we just look like the extreme Christian right. To them we look like the essence of patriarchy, whiteness, overpopulation, environmental destruction, religion etc.

To me, the problem is that so many Christians don't seem to know the difference between following Jesus and following some fairly extreme political figures who are not even remotely Christian. I don't think most Christians are like that, but the more extreme Christians are also some of the loudest ones.

To be clear, we conservative Mennonites do not believe in wielding political power over our ideological foes. The weapons of our warfare are not carnal. But our foes do believe in that. So while physically we are defenseless, they in turn, have nothing physically to fear from the ones who are commanded to suffer injustice peacefully, us.

But it often doesn't look like that when people feel the need to attack others day after day after day, along political lines, and don't spend a whole lot of time and energy discussing things that are not carnal. And it doesn't look like that when we talk as though the celebrity political heroes of the carnal world are our own celebrity heroes.

Again, I don't think you do that. I don't think most people here do that. But there are enough posts on MN that do that to make quite an impression on someone who happens on this site and wants to know what Mennonites think.

[Bootstrap]

Here I refer to the declaration against Mastriano subscribed by 77 Mennonite clergypersons in Pa. (https://anabaptistworld.org/christian-n ... ued-in-pa/). I couldn't get the exact wording (can't get it in Germany for whatever reason), but in the sympathetic presentation by "Anabaptist World" the declaration culminates in the well-worn catchphrase that "Jesus' kingdom is not of this world".

That's more relevant than the obituary, I think. You pay $50 to write an obituary for Anabaptist World, it's not written by their editors.

Here's the quote:

Mastriano is an outspoken Christian endorsed by Donald Trump who has been described as a proponent of Christian nationalism and been linked to a CMC congregation (formerly Conservative Mennonite Conference).

The statement equates Christian ­nationalism with idolatry because Jesus’ kingdom is not of this world.

I have to agree with that. Christian nationalism is pretty much the polar opposite of any traditional Mennonite understanding of Christianity. Mennonites don't join the Proud Boys to Take Back Our Country.

On the other hand, the editorial that this article refers to is pretty lefty and seems to favor LGBTQ. Some of the things it says are good, others leave me shaking my head.

I think there's a lot of hypocrisy among Mennonites across the spectrum when it comes to political themes. But maybe that's not terribly surprising - all human beings fall short of our ideals, all human beings are inconsistent, we are all hypocrites. And the most hypocritical Christians of all are often the ones who specialize in everyone else's hypocrisy.

I think Jesus mentioned that a few times.

[Ken]

Some replies to my critics:

1. If "Anabaptist World" reports about this, it is definitely a matter of "Anabaptist practice" (not only of "politics").

2. My attribute "fawning" in particular refers to the headline "Former S.D. governor lived out lessons for high school government classes". What is meant with that strange "lived out lessons"? That he was moved by the noble unselfish motive to practice what he had been teaching? The article does not even try to confirm this.

3. Progressive Mennonites have no qualms with using political power - I'm quite prepared to believe that, Ken does not need not to convince me. My argument is that progressive Mennonites feign a distance from the state when they want to have an effect on conservative Mennonites.
Here I refer to the declaration against Mastriano subscribed by 77 Mennonite clergypersons in Pa. (https://anabaptistworld.org/christian-n ... ued-in-pa/). I couldn't get the exact wording (can't get it in Germany for whatever reason), but in the sympathetic presentation by "Anabaptist World" the declaration culminates in the well-worn catchphrase that "Jesus' kingdom is not of this world".
I don't pretend that I understand this very obscure formula. But in the present context it seems to mean that it is inappropriate to give Christian motives or reasons for your political agenda. At least for conservatives. Whereas I never have observed any such misgivings when progressives advanced Christian motives or reasons for their political agenda. And that's what I call double standards ...

Here is the actual declaration by 77 clergy that you reference, which is not "against Mastriano" as you assert. In fact it doesn't even mention Mastriano. It is a critique of Christian Nationalism. :https://www.penncapital-star.com/commen ... y-opinion/

Nowhere does it mention Mastriano or any other candidate. In fact it is pretty milquetoast. What specific in this declaration against Christian nationalism do you object to?

And this also isn't a "Menno" declaration. It is an ecumenical bunch of clergy from mainstream denominations like Episcopal, Methodist, Lutheran, Baptist, UCC, etc. On first glance I only see 4 out of the 77 signatories who represent Mennonite churches.

[RZehr]

LOL. What does the far left LGBTQ and abortion fear from the far right? Let’s not be ignorant. These extremes have zero tolerance for each other, they hate each other.
Laws. Dictation. Fines, confiscation, cancellation, imprisonment.

Sure, but I would hope that Mennonites and other Christians are neither the far left nor the far right.

And FWIW, I don't think most Americans are, either.

Well of course. No one here is suggesting that. But the question was, what do we fear? The question was not, whether or not Mennonites or Americans are extreme. Unfortunately, our conservative Mennonite traditional positions and actions, as far as the far left is concerned, puts us in the far right camp. And as such, we find ourselves in the crosshairs. That is a threat.

Religious persecution. They hate the Christian right, and to them, we just look like the extreme Christian right. To them we look like the essence of patriarchy, whiteness, overpopulation, environmental destruction, religion etc.

To me, the problem is that so many Christians don't seem to know the difference between following Jesus and following some fairly extreme political figures who are not even remotely Christian. I don't think most Christians are like that, but the more extreme Christians are also some of the loudest ones.

That’s hardly the key reason we are threatened. Which again, was the question. After all, for 200 years, noisy, extreme, hypocritical political Christians dominated this country. But we conservative Mennonites generally were left alone. Now, we are under threat by liberals who are not going to “live and let live” but instead demand participation. This is new.

To be clear, we conservative Mennonites do not believe in wielding political power over our ideological foes. The weapons of our warfare are not carnal. But our foes do believe in that. So while physically we are defenseless, they in turn, have nothing physically to fear from the ones who are commanded to suffer injustice peacefully, us.

But it often doesn't look like that when people feel the need to attack others day after day after day, along political lines, and don't spend a whole lot of time and energy discussing things that are not carnal. And it doesn't look like that when we talk as though the celebrity political heroes of the carnal world are our own celebrity heroes.

Again, I don't think you do that. I don't think most people here do that. But there are enough posts on MN that do that to make quite an impression on someone who happens on this site and wants to know what Mennonites think.

Maybe so. Maybe you should dial back the political rhetoric, or political opinions?

[temporal1]

Some replies to my critics:
1. If "Anabaptist World" reports about this, it is definitely a matter of "Anabaptist practice" (not only of "politics").

2. My attribute "fawning" in particular refers to the headline "Former S.D. governor lived out lessons for high school government classes". What is meant with that strange "lived out lessons"? That he was moved by the noble unselfish motive to practice what he had been teaching? The article does not even try to confirm this.

3. Progressive Mennonites have no qualms with using political power - I'm quite prepared to believe that, Ken does not need not to convince me. My argument is that progressive Mennonites feign a distance from the state when they want to have an effect on conservative Mennonites.
Here I refer to the declaration against Mastriano subscribed by 77 Mennonite clergypersons in Pa. (https://anabaptistworld.org/christian-n ... ued-in-pa/). I couldn't get the exact wording (can't get it in Germany for whatever reason), but in the sympathetic presentation by "Anabaptist World" the declaration culminates in the well-worn catchphrase that "Jesus' kingdom is not of this world".

I don't pretend that I understand this very obscure formula.
But in the present context it seems to mean that it is inappropriate to give Christian motives or reasons for your political agenda.

At least for conservatives.
Whereas I never have observed any such misgivings when progressives advanced Christian motives or reasons for their political agenda.

And that's what I call double standards ...

Nice explanation of your thinking. Thank you.
i, at last, see it as a conundrum.

i would add, the terms, “far-right” and “far-left” have been made ridiculously mercurial, in recent years where, esp, far-right, is employed at the “drop of a hat” (esp by lib media) to SMEAR anything they-don’t-like. (My sense is, this is as true in Europe as in the U.S.?)

The abuse of this phrase was established when any sort of reference to Christianity became automatically swept up as
far-right/Far-Right. It’s trivialized.

Lib media is great for ruining language, they throw out words, their acolytes pick them up, repeat-repeat-repeat, to the extent they become meaningless. (racism, insurrection, election deniers) and on+on.

Words/judgments are parroted without the slightest concern of reality, or the ever-annoying, “innocent until proven guilty.”
It’s really bad. It shows up on this “august” forum everyday.

[Josh]

Boot,

The last MC USA conference was dominated by the extreme far left; for example, the resolution that any interaction with another denomination must be subordinate to promoting LGBT. (Hence why US MB pulled out of their Bible study/commentary project.)

I do not think this represents the rank and file MC USA church attender.

There is no Mennonite denomination whose conferences and leadership are dominated by the “far right”. People keep bleating about Mastriano, yet he’s not in leadership of the CMC and it’s not even clear if he is a member. His wife was at some sort of retreat once. That’s it. (Mastriano is also not “far right”, unless we want to change the goalposts quite a bit.)

I share RZehr’s concern: I am not interested in politics, but politics is VERY interested in me. Here are things we have to deal with in the US, California, UK, Canada, NZ, and Australia:

- banning attending church for an entire year
- banning singing in church
- arresting pastors
- outlawing spanking children
- shutting down church operated schools for not teaching a secular/liberal curriculum and not having government approved teachers
- banning praying near an abortion clinic
- forcing new “safety” devices against historic Anabaptist practice (LED lights, blinkers, bright colours, and so on)
- mandatory vaccines some have an abortion related objection against

The list could go on and on. The above is all things that have to be dealt with. For those who live in a “hostile” state like California, Oregon, or Quebec, it’s a much more present threat than those of us who are comfortably in Ohio, but even in Ohio, the police in Wayne County are busy ticketing buggy drivers for not installing the latest blinking LED light safety fad.

[Ken]

- forcing new “safety” devices against historic Anabaptist practice (LED lights, blinkers, bright colours, and so on)

Oh, no. Not the safety devices!....

Is this you Josh?

https://www.dailybonnet.com/mennonite-m ... f-privacy/

Mennonite Man Claims Using Turn Signal is a “Violation of Privacy”

Local man Wilmer Peters, 68, has been driving around Calgary for decades without ever using his turn signal, which he claims is a violation of his privacy.

“I don’t need people looking over my shoulder (or the back of my car) and knowing where I’m going,” explained Peters. “It’s none of their business whether I’m turning right to go to Peters Drive-in or left to go to Chili Hut! That’s none of their concern!”

Peters says he really doesn’t like to give out personal information to just any random person who happens to be traversing Crowchild Trail or 16th Ave.

“If I want to change lanes or make a U-ie, that’s my for me to know and you to find out just moments before I do it,” said Peters. “This is a free country, ain’t it?”

Peters says he’s also removed the brake lights from his car as that, too, was disclosing too much personal information to fellow drivers.

[Josh]

I have turn signals on my car. I respect Amish who don’t want to buy and install every latest blinking flashing LED on their buggies without their church discerning and approving it first.

The Supreme Court happens to agree with me, too.

[Jazman]

Some replies to my critics:

1. If "Anabaptist World" reports about this, it is definitely a matter of "Anabaptist practice" (not only of "politics").

2. My attribute "fawning" in particular refers to the headline "Former S.D. governor lived out lessons for high school government classes". What is meant with that strange "lived out lessons"? That he was moved by the noble unselfish motive to practice what he had been teaching? The article does not even try to confirm this.

3. Progressive Mennonites have no qualms with using political power - I'm quite prepared to believe that, Ken does not need not to convince me. My argument is that progressive Mennonites feign a distance from the state when they want to have an effect on conservative Mennonites.
Here I refer to the declaration against Mastriano subscribed by 77 Mennonite clergypersons in Pa. (https://anabaptistworld.org/christian-n ... ued-in-pa/). I couldn't get the exact wording (can't get it in Germany for whatever reason), but in the sympathetic presentation by "Anabaptist World" the declaration culminates in the well-worn catchphrase that "Jesus' kingdom is not of this world".
I don't pretend that I understand this very obscure formula. But in the present context it seems to mean that it is inappropriate to give Christian motives or reasons for your political agenda. At least for conservatives. Whereas I never have observed any such misgivings when progressives advanced Christian motives or reasons for their political agenda. And that's what I call double standards ...

Thanks for the clarifications. I can understand your reasoning here and the point you're making, particularly #3.