Josh wrote: ↑Mon Feb 26, 2024 9:30 am
Neto wrote: ↑Mon Feb 26, 2024 7:41 am
I have not responded to the poll, because the classifications follow only the Swiss Brethren tradition, excluding Dutch Mennonites altogether, all the way back to Menno Simons. I would also suggest that it is actually following a later preoccupation in Swiss Brethren circles with the use of "outward appearances". (Like a specific style of dress, for both male & female. But I am not referring to things like the veiling.) I am not criticizing this approach, and nor is this an appeal to change anyone's standards for practice, just saying that people of my heritage do not fit anywhere here. (I'm reminded of the time, way back when I first got to know non-Dutch Mennonites for the first time, a discussion of what would be a good symbol of "Mennonite culture". I mentioned the zwiebach as a symbol of the survival of our people, and the Deitsch people looked at me with blank looks - they didn't even know what I was talking about. I did not realize that this bread is only made in the Plautdietsch culture, not at all in the PA Deitsch culture.)
I'm not entirely sure I'd agree with zweibach as a symbol either. Holdemans are largely a Russian Mennonite group in background, although they accepted Swiss Brethren, Lutherans, and a variety of other people as well. Yet zweibach is extinct (my in laws don't know what it is or care about it), at least in the U.S.; perhaps some people in Canada know what it is. On the flip side, everyone in my congregation gets excited about making pepper nuts (
Pfeffernusse) at Christmastime - even the Swiss background people. In other circles I've never seen pepper nuts at all.
It is definitely true, however, that the Dutch Anabaptist background means much less focus on "dress issues". Holdemans don't even generally think of themselves as "plain people" or "conservative", even though by any practical definition, they are.
Also, some terms have been used in a sense different from common usage, such as "Mainline". In the way this term is normally used (or at least in the past - maybe I have not kept up with changes), it refers only to the old Protestant denominations, which in my somewhat more fuzzy understanding would require the practice of infant baptism, and possibly also more-than-symbolic views of the bread & the wine in communion.
It is a novel term I think Ernie invented (or maybe I did), but I like it too. We can identify people in Mennonite churches that are basically identical to the mainline Protestant Methodist church down the street. We should call these people Anabaptists (Mainline). Likewise, we can identify ones that are progressive, just like the progressive Methodist church across town. We should call them Anabaptists (Progressive-Liberal). And then we can identify Mennonite churches that seem very much like an evangelical church. We should call them Anabaptists (Evangelical).
I do think a distinction should be made for Anabaptists (Theological-Conservative), who definitely do exist as a distinct thing. The Theological-Conservative (like Rosedale / CMC) wouldn't ordain women, but the Evangelical (LMC / Lancaster Conference), Progressive-Liberal (MC USA Central District Conference), and Mainline (MC USA Virginia Conference) all would.
Now, let's ask the question if these categories Ernie proposed fit Russian Mennonite / Dutch Anabaptist background people. I think they can:
Anabaptist (Progressive-Liberal) - yes, MC USA Central District Conference has a large Russian Mennonite background
Anabaptist (Mainline) - yes, Canadian Conference of MBs ordain women, but do not accept LGBT marriage/ordinations
Anabaptist (Evangelical) - yes, some U.S. MBs are essentially evangelical in orientation (particularly the "mega church" style ones)
Anabaptist (non-Plain Theological Conservative) - I don't actually know of any Russian Mennonite background groups that align neatly with the philosophy that prevails in Rosedale / CMC. I am reasonably certain it would exist though, probably amongst U.S. MB background people.
Anabaptist (Plain Conservative) - Holdemans would be an obvious example of this. Kleine Gemeinde (Oklahoma / Texas) would be another.
Anabaptist (Old Order) - Old Colonists would be an obvious example of this.
Of note is that Dutch Anabaptists who persist today often were organised along very ethnic lines, so you have Chortitzers, Molosch, Polsch, and others. Amongst Holdemans the Russian Mennonite background is basically Polsch and Molosch and these groups tended not to intermarry until around 40-50 years ago. There may be significant cultural differences between them that persist to this day.