Why have the Anabaptists FAILED at Reaching the Masses

[mrbilliam]

This will probably get under some people's skin. I'm simply trying to speak truth here.

The Anabaptists started in 1525-1535. Yet there are BARELY any churches in any major city in America. In some of the largest metropolitan areas in the United States there is barely any representation of the Anabaptist faith.

The Lutherans started in 1517, and have churches all through cities, sometimes hundreds of them in large cities.
The Baptists started in 1638, and they have TONS of churches all through cities, the countryside, small towns, and large towns.
The Methodists started in 1787, and they have MANY churches all through cities, the countryside, small towns, and large towns.

Often through much of America, where you see a Baptist church there is a nearby Methodist church.

Presbyterian churches started in 1560, and they have a very decent presence all through America.'
Assemblies of God churches started in 1911. They have 3 million members today.
Seventh day Adventists started 160 years ago, and they have 23 million members today and churches all through America and the world.

Skipping Mennonite USA churches, I've heard worldwide any "head covering" type of Anabaptist church there are roughly 360,000 members.


Folks we stink. This is bad. This is heretical. On paper we preach Matthew 28's Great Commission but we do not practice it. In our hearts we'd rather pick each other's lives apart, create elitism, create cultural inclusiveness, keep outsiders at bay, and stay in "cornfields". Barely anybody joins because frankly the Anabaptists have made it impossible.

Excuses: "Well we do pretty extreme lifestyles". Blah, folks, the Eastern/Oriental Orthodox have VERY extreme lifestyles and worship and they have 330+ MILLION members and are world wide.

We are lost. We have decided on a culture of "saving our own lives", whereas Jesus said "we will lose it".

How does anybody remain an Anabaptist at this point...? We should be able to plainly see what happens.

1) Evangelism is to prisons/drug cases. While good... This actually creates a "Mennonite Trophy". These are people that have changed their lives and makes the church feel better. The Mennonite trophy feels accepted but is not really "juiced in" ever. It's trickery. "Look what our system did" is the thought process. Rarely is the solid in-tact family joining with 1st time husband, wife, and children.

2) Evangelism is also to very foreign countries. While good.... This actually creates a "rich white man came to my country" church. Food. Money. Hope.

We can't hold our own in USA cities. We are too scared. We are cowards.

If Paul was a Mennonite (shipwrecks, beatings, and death (in cities by the way)) we'd never have the New Testament or a church. In Menno circles we'd sit around quietly casting side-glances and judging a brother "making it happen" like Paul while shoving ham potatoes down our throats at fellowship meal. Don't forget the full plate of desserts and talking about monetary work with the bros while Jesus looks down - wondering why "God's people" are eating drinking and being merry rather than doing what he told them to do.

This is a club with a Christian wrapper.

Thank you for reading.

[Josh]

This will probably get under some people's skin. I'm simply trying to speak truth here.

The Anabaptists started in 1525-1535. Yet there are BARELY any churches in any major city in America. In some of the largest metropolitan areas in the United States there is barely any representation of the Anabaptist faith.

Metropolitan areas in America are full of churn (and full of closed churches). I grew up in cities, and one of the things I remember is the large, impressive church buildings that either had very low attendance (and this was back in the 1980s and 1990s), or else were closed.

The Lutherans started in 1517, and have churches all through cities, sometimes hundreds of them in large cities.
The Baptists started in 1638, and they have TONS of churches all through cities, the countryside, small towns, and large towns.
The Methodists started in 1787, and they have MANY churches all through cities, the countryside, small towns, and large towns.

The Methodist churches around here have struggling attendance - if they aren't already closed. The same goes for Lutheran churches. The most common sight is a closed building. A few of them struggle to survive by running preschools, pancake breakfasts, and Swiss steak suppers.

The ones in the countryside and small towns usually aren't closed yet. In the larger cities the magnificent old cathedral style buildings are just closed.

Often through much of America, where you see a Baptist church there is a nearby Methodist church.

Presbyterian churches started in 1560, and they have a very decent presence all through America.'
Assemblies of God churches started in 1911. They have 3 million members today.
Seventh day Adventists started 160 years ago, and they have 23 million members today and churches all through America and the world.

Skipping Mennonite USA churches, I've heard worldwide any "head covering" type of Anabaptist church there are roughly 360,000 members.

300,000 members would be the population of the Amish in North America. Overall Anabaptist population in North America is estimated to be about 1 million (including youth and children who will likely become members someday).

Folks we stink. This is bad. This is heretical. On paper we preach Matthew 28's Great Commission but we do not practice it. In our hearts we'd rather pick each other's lives apart, create elitism, create cultural inclusiveness, keep outsiders at bay, and stay in "cornfields". Barely anybody joins because frankly the Anabaptists have made it impossible.

I think it's fine to be in "cornfields". Life in large cities is very transitional with people frequently moving and frequently moving out. It is very dependent on the car, so it doesn't work for the largest Anabaptist group - Amish people. Property is insanely expensive.

There is 1 Anabaptist group that does settle in cities, Apostolic Christians. They are often faced with the people in their church all drive an hour from different directions to get to church. This makes things like operating schools or doing much at church outside of Sundays and maybe Wednesday nights difficult.

Excuses: "Well we do pretty extreme lifestyles". Blah, folks, the Eastern/Oriental Orthodox have VERY extreme lifestyles and worship and they have 330+ MILLION members and are world wide.

Eastern Orthodox are also an essentially ethnic faith, with half of those members being Russians for whom it is more a mark of nationalism or ethnic identity than faith. In Serbia, a lot of people identify as "Eastern Orthodox" and "atheist" at the same time. Somewhere I read that average attendance at Serbian EO churches is 2 per service. That's not a thriving church.

I would not say that EOs have extreme lifestyles. The ones I have worked with, I barely noticed anything about their lifestyle at all - the only way you could tell they were EO was the little icon of some saint or something at the cash register at the bar/nightclub they owned.

How does anybody remain an Anabaptist at this point...? We should be able to plainly see what happens.

That's an easy answer - Anabaptists remain Anabaptists, except in the transitional Anabaptist churches. (Unfortunately this includes most of the Beachy churches.)

1) Evangelism is to prisons/drug cases. While good... This actually creates a "Mennonite Trophy". These are people that have changed their lives and makes the church feel better. The Mennonite trophy feels accepted but is not really "juiced in" ever. It's trickery. "Look what our system did" is the thought process. Rarely is the solid in-tact family joining with 1st time husband, wife, and children.

What's wrong with lost and broken people deciding to give their lives to Christ and join a good church?

2) Evangelism is also to very foreign countries. While good.... This actually creates a "rich white man came to my country" church. Food. Money. Hope.

My own denomination's churches have indigenous leadership in Nigeria, Brazil, Haiti (good thing - it's virtually impossible to go there right now), Malawi, Togo, and other places. It is simply a choice whether or not to do this.

We can't hold our own in USA cities. We are too scared. We are cowards.

We have a stable church in NYC. Nearly every seeker who joins ends up moving somewhere else. The moment they start travelling to visit other congregations, they find out how low the cost of housing is and how good quality of life can be in the rural areas. Then they go back to NYC and see what a rat race it is. Often, they are offered a job out in the rural areas that's better than the job they have in NYC.

Would you expect such seekers to stay in NYC? Most of them are immigrants, too. It's not like they are tied down to NYC because of family or ancestral ties or something.

If Paul was a Mennonite (shipwrecks, beatings, and death (in cities by the way)) we'd never have the New Testament or a church. In Menno circles we'd sit around quietly casting side-glances and judging a brother "making it happen" like Paul while shoving ham potatoes down our throats at fellowship meal. Don't forget the full plate of desserts and talking about monetary work with the bros while Jesus looks down - wondering why "God's people" are eating drinking and being merry rather than doing what he told them to do.

This is a club with a Christian wrapper.

Thank you for reading.

I would encourage you to look into what other Mennonite/Anabaptist groups with a more biblical rule of life are doing. I, too, felt very discouraged when I was in a more liberal church. The Beachy mission church I was part of in Australia has gone extinct and doesn't even exist anymore. Nowadays I feel like I am in a thriving church that has good mission programs, including domestic missions. A lot of our missionaries simply go to a city.

The challenge remains that nearly every seeker who is interested... ends up moving out of the city... myself included!

[GaryK]

This will probably get under some people's skin. I'm simply trying to speak truth here.

The Anabaptists started in 1525-1535. Yet there are BARELY any churches in any major city in America. In some of the largest metropolitan areas in the United States there is barely any representation of the Anabaptist faith.

The Lutherans started in 1517, and have churches all through cities, sometimes hundreds of them in large cities.
The Baptists started in 1638, and they have TONS of churches all through cities, the countryside, small towns, and large towns.
The Methodists started in 1787, and they have MANY churches all through cities, the countryside, small towns, and large towns.

Often through much of America, where you see a Baptist church there is a nearby Methodist church.

Presbyterian churches started in 1560, and they have a very decent presence all through America.'
Assemblies of God churches started in 1911. They have 3 million members today.
Seventh day Adventists started 160 years ago, and they have 23 million members today and churches all through America and the world.

Skipping Mennonite USA churches, I've heard worldwide any "head covering" type of Anabaptist church there are roughly 360,000 members.


Folks we stink. This is bad. This is heretical. On paper we preach Matthew 28's Great Commission but we do not practice it. In our hearts we'd rather pick each other's lives apart, create elitism, create cultural inclusiveness, keep outsiders at bay, and stay in "cornfields". Barely anybody joins because frankly the Anabaptists have made it impossible.

Excuses: "Well we do pretty extreme lifestyles". Blah, folks, the Eastern/Oriental Orthodox have VERY extreme lifestyles and worship and they have 330+ MILLION members and are world wide.

We are lost. We have decided on a culture of "saving our own lives", whereas Jesus said "we will lose it".

How does anybody remain an Anabaptist at this point...? We should be able to plainly see what happens.

1) Evangelism is to prisons/drug cases. While good... This actually creates a "Mennonite Trophy". These are people that have changed their lives and makes the church feel better. The Mennonite trophy feels accepted but is not really "juiced in" ever. It's trickery. "Look what our system did" is the thought process. Rarely is the solid in-tact family joining with 1st time husband, wife, and children.

2) Evangelism is also to very foreign countries. While good.... This actually creates a "rich white man came to my country" church. Food. Money. Hope.

We can't hold our own in USA cities. We are too scared. We are cowards.

If Paul was a Mennonite (shipwrecks, beatings, and death (in cities by the way)) we'd never have the New Testament or a church. In Menno circles we'd sit around quietly casting side-glances and judging a brother "making it happen" like Paul while shoving ham potatoes down our throats at fellowship meal. Don't forget the full plate of desserts and talking about monetary work with the bros while Jesus looks down - wondering why "God's people" are eating drinking and being merry rather than doing what he told them to do.

This is a club with a Christian wrapper.

Thank you for reading.

I don't disagree that we have our share of problems as it relates to outreach and church-planting, but one thing I've learned over the years is that hand-wringing alone doesn't solve these problems. What I have found meaningful, is to get involved myself in outreach, mentoring and being involved in Kingdom work. Doing so, I've found, has the tendency to lessen ones focus on the big group problems, which most denominations seem to have, and focuses on what we are called to be and do as a follower of Jesus. It becomes more of a response to the teachings of Jesus and the Apostles rather than a reaction to what's wrong with our way of doing things as CA's.

[temporal1]

This morning, i first read this topic, which i believe was written with a sincere and loving heart.
The coincidence of then reading the very next topic still has my head spinning:

Japan
viewtopic.php?t=6965
OP:

Below is something I just wrote for my own site that I think may be of interest here:

I lived in Japan in the 1990s. My wife went back 10 years ago and said that things had decayed. I just visited Japan again with my wife. I think the "decay" is mostly superficial and in fact Japan is remarkably resilient against modern culture. Japan copies styles but remains Japanese underneath. So Japan copying modern western styles doesn't mean much. Japanese behavior is still distinctly Japanese. Japan remains a high-trust ethnocentric culture that resists modern values.

I can speculate on how they managed this. First, they are a high-tech culture with a distinct language. This means that the internet content that they consume is mostly their own. And this protects them from the worst source of cultural infection, namely modern culture on the internet. In addition, they have a collectivist culture which prevents individuals from going in new directions, so this helps to preserve their culture. And they have limited immigration.

I know of 3 groups that effectively resist modern culture: Japan, traditional Anabaptists, and Orthodox Jews. I think Japan and the Anabaptists have a lot in common in their strategies. The Anabaptists avoid internet infection by limiting internet use. The Anabaptists are also collectivist, and have limited immigration (into their groups). Orthodox Jews also limit internet use and have limited immigration, but they are not collectivist. Instead of collectivism, Jews view outsiders (goyim) as subhumans. This seems to work as effectively as collectivism in avoiding outside cultural influence.

For individuals who can't tolerate modern culture, I suggest either moving to Japan or moving to an Anabaptist area.

GaryK to mrbilliam:
I don't disagree that we have our share of problems as it relates to outreach and church-planting, but one thing I've learned over the years is that hand-wringing alone doesn't solve these problems. What I have found meaningful, is to get involved myself in outreach, mentoring and being involved in Kingdom work. Doing so, I've found, has the tendency to lessen ones focus on the big group problems, which most denominations seem to have, and focuses on what we are called to be and do as a follower of Jesus.

It becomes more of a response to the teachings of Jesus and the Apostles rather than a reaction to what's wrong with our way of doing things as CA's.

GaryK and others on this forum model living faith IRL, IRT.
God bless and direct each one of us.

[Ernie]

In addition to what Gary said,

I recommend that people who believe they are called of God to do church planting in cities, begin pursuing such a path, being sensitive to how and where God may direct or redirect them.

The first step is to develop the kind of character that the NT outlines for elders and deacons. While doing that, people can begin studying the demographics of the area that they want to settle in and begin looking for team members. I've seen over and over that people of character who are willing to wait on God, will be sent by churches that are not known for doing this sort of thing. When people are being led of the Spirit, churches somehow sense this. Even though they would like to keep people with them in their rural settings, they are willing to bless people to leave them.
One way to prepare is to attend the Church Planters Forum that is held in Pennsylvania each year in June. We had about 160 people show up this year.
There are many recordings, documents and books listed at our website that can help a person prepare as well. https://churchplantersforum.org/

Yesterday a family from a rural setting moved to our area to work with us in starting a church here in our city. The deacon's wife who provided the meal at the new house, kept telling us that she could not be friends with us yesterday because we were taking such a lovely family away from their church. She was saying it would take her some time until she could forgive us. (She was saying all of this in good humor, but serious at the same time. Nobody likes to see charactered people leaving the church.) This family had intended to move to Utah, but those doors closed. They had interest in moving to a city in Rhode Island, but those doors closed also. So they resigned themselves to staying where they were for the time being and serve their church. It was about a year later that we asked them to join us in church planting.
 
If a personal vision is truly of the Lord, nothing can stop it.
God's will, done in God's way, and according to God's timing, will never lack God's blessing.

[Robert]

Anabaptism is the narrow way. It is not easy for many. The Peace issue is one we dealt with as we worked at growing our congregations.

Believers baptism used to be another, but that has become much more acceptable.

We did grow our churches, but we often found many who could accept some of the Anabaptist principles, but struggled with others. I would willingly direct them towards churches they could connect with better. Better to grow the Kingdom then grow one church.

[Ernie]

Why have the Anabaptists failed at reaching the masses?

Mainline and Progressive Anabaptists have attempted reaching the masses. But their efforts have largely failed because of watering down the Gospel.

Old Order and Conservative Anabaptists have failed at this because they rarely attempt it.

[MaxPC]

I don't disagree that we have our share of problems as it relates to outreach and church-planting, but one thing I've learned over the years is that hand-wringing alone doesn't solve these problems. What I have found meaningful, is to get involved myself in outreach, mentoring and being involved in Kingdom work. Doing so, I've found, has the tendency to lessen ones focus on the big group problems, which most denominations seem to have, and focuses on what we are called to be and do as a follower of Jesus. It becomes more of a response to the teachings of Jesus and the Apostles rather than a reaction to what's wrong with our way of doing things as CA's.

Better to grow the Kingdom then grow one church.

Amen. Spot on.

1 Corinthians 1
23 but we preach Christ crucified, a stumbling block to Jews and folly to Gentiles, 24 but to those who are called, both Jews and Greeks, Christ the power of God and the wisdom of God. 25 For the foolishness of God is wiser than men, and the weakness of God is stronger than men.

26 For consider your call, brethren; not many of you were wise according to worldly standards, not many were powerful, not many were of noble birth; 27 but God chose what is foolish in the world to shame the wise, God chose what is weak in the world to shame the strong, 28 God chose what is low and despised in the world, even things that are not, to bring to nothing things that are, 29 so that no human being might boast in the presence of God. 30 He is the source of your life in Christ Jesus, whom God made our wisdom, our righteousness and sanctification and redemption;

[Ken]

First of all, the US is not the world. The US is only about 4% of the world population. But trends in the US also mirror trends elsewhere.

Within both the US and worldwide the fastest growing religious groups are Pentecostals and Muslims. Mormons are also still growing but more slowly than in decades past. So if you want to know what succeeds, look to the Pentecostals I guess.

But yes, Anabaptists are not even rounding error either in the US or worldwide. And what groups are growing are mostly doing so through birth rates not conversions. Which is not sustainable long-term. No population group anywhere on the planet maintains high population growth forever. When conservative Amish groups with large families are forced to shift away from farming their family sizes will rapidly fall like those of every other group.

My guess own take based on nothing more than observation is that Anabaptists are too "ethnic" to hold widespread appeal. The dress, language, food, customs, lack of diversity, and insularity just isn't very welcoming to outsiders. A few "seeker" types might find it appealing. But there isn't widespread appeal just like there isn't widespread appeal for any other highly-ethnic denomination like the Ethiopian Orthodox Tewahedo Church. Or the Maronite Christians in Lebanon. For example, there are long detailed instructions on how to be a "seeker" in a CA church published here on this forum and elsewhere. It shouldn't be that difficult and certainly wasn't that difficult during Biblical times.

[Josh]

First of all, the US is not the world. The US is only about 4% of the world population. But trends in the US also mirror trends elsewhere.

Anabaptists have no problem with strong church growth outside of North America.

Within both the US and worldwide the fastest growing religious groups are Pentecostals and Muslims. Mormons are also still growing but more slowly than in decades past. So if you want to know what succeeds, look to the Pentecostals I guess.

“Growth” of Muslims is almost entirely from immigration. Islam is essentially an ethnic faith, much like Catholicism,
Orthodoxy, or what its detractors claim Anabaptism is.

But yes, Anabaptists are not even rounding error either in the US or worldwide. And what groups are growing are mostly doing so through birth rates not conversions. Which is not sustainable long-term. No population group anywhere on the planet maintains high population growth forever. When conservative Amish groups with large families are forced to shift away from farming their family sizes will rapidly fall like those of every other group.

You keep saying “forced to shift away from farming.” Is the need to grow food somehow going to go away?

My guess own take based on nothing more than observation is that Anabaptists are too "ethnic" to hold widespread appeal. The dress, language, food, customs, lack of diversity, and insularity just isn't very welcoming to outsiders. A few "seeker" types might find it appealing. But there isn't widespread appeal just like there isn't widespread appeal for any other highly-ethnic denomination like the Ethiopian Orthodox Tewahedo Church. Or the Maronite Christians in Lebanon. For example, there are long detailed instructions on how to be a "seeker" in a CA church published here on this forum and elsewhere. It shouldn't be that difficult and certainly wasn't that difficult during Biblical times.

Despite these claims my own church has no problems with quality growth in places like, well, Ethiopia.