Why have the Anabaptists FAILED at Reaching the Masses

[Josh]

A few thoughts...

First of all, every major metro already has a megachurch (and often several) trying the exact formula mrbilliam describes. You are entering a very crowded field, except:

- The megachurches won't expect divorced & remarried people to separate. mrbilliam expressed early he doesn't want to just see a drug addict or ex-prisoner join, but wants a whole family. Well, the typical family will have a divorce & remarriage situation.
- The megachurches don't expect people to start to dress modestly, wear headcoverings, etc. before they can come to communion.
- The megachurches are well-funded and have a lot of programs including paid stuff and a well-paid senior pastor.
- The megachurches don't expect people to be nonresistant. Try adding to your program "get rid of your concealed carry gun and permit" and you can expect to have a lot less interest.
- The megachurches don't expect people to disengage with politics.

It is not trivial to say "just move to the city and live there and start businesses". Starting businesses in the city is hard. You can't count on hiring other Mennonites & Amish to work for $10 an hour and do a good job. You will have to pay a lot more for help that is less dependable, less reliable, and probably less productive. Likewise, you will be facing a lot more competition. You can't just open a barn lot or start a painting business, drywalling, etc. and expect to have lots of business.

If you expect families to move to the city, do you realise how much it will cost them to do so? Take a major metro like Chicago. A reasonable house for a family with 5 kids will cost north of $400,000. Or they can pay rent north of $3,000/mo for just a modest 3 bedroom apartment type of arrangement. And at those prices it may not even be in the best of neighbourhoods. That means dad (and mom) will have to get good paying jobs to be able to pay for all of this.

Land for your church and school will be hard to come by - and you'll need a school, because (a) to afford it all, mom will need to work, and (b) the public schools will probably not be suitable. Or you can locate an hour plus from the church and city and dad can commute in, but then what's the point? Anabaptists already live within an hour or two of most major metros. (You may get lucky and be able to rent an existing church building that has shut down; cities are full of closed church buildings because interest in religion in the big cities - and the smaller ones - and even the small towns - has shrunk drastically over the last 20 years.)

In short, you will have to stop being plain Anabaptists, including some things that are quite valuable about our culture, and will have to become suburban yuppie Americans chasing a middle class lifestyle in the rat race instead. You will have to go deep into debt. You and your wife will have to go get high paying corporate jobs. You will need to juggle driving kids to school, activities, and daycare. It won't be practical to have a large family - 2 kids will seem like plenty.

Your young people will find that can't afford to buy a home at all and are priced out of this market, in addition to having difficulty finding a good job. They will need to go to college and enter into hundreds of thousands of dollars of debt in order to get a career good enough to afford to live in the city. And it is very, very likely they will both fall into sexual immorality and also that they will lose their faith once they go there.

Here's a better idea: there are many people seeking to both live a better life and also for answers to life questions, who are open to following Christ. Why not let them answer that call and move to our Anabaptist communities? That is what has happened to the Holdemans every time we try to set up a city mission, whether in the USA, Canada, or Brazil. The seekers we have had have spent their life dreaming of being able to have a peaceful, quiet lifestyle in the countryside - and they leap at the first opportunity to have it.

In my opinion, this is a very good thing. I count myself among the people who have done exactly that. I am glad my days of sitting in traffic in New York City, San Francisco, Tel Aviv, Melbourne, Montréal, and D.C. are over.

[Ken]

I tend to think you are correct Josh. That conservative Anabaptism is largely incompatible with urban/suburban living. Basically for the reasons you cite.

Which basically means that conservative Anabaptism is largely going to be limited to the 15% or so of the country (by population) that is rural or rural leaning. It is just another way of restating mrbilliam’s main thesis because the percentage of the population that is rural is low and declining. And it is not just for practical reasons. Rural life is deeply embedded in Anabaptist culture. Anabaptists (at least those who migrated to North America) have always been a rural people. And it isn’t just conservative Anabaptists my rural Menno kin who are not conservative all still have an enormous sense of superiority when it comes to rural life. My facebook feed was full of rural memes back when I was still following extended family on facebook. And I get it endlessly when we are together for reunions.

This is in contrast to say Hasidic Jews. But Hasidic Jews have never been a rural people. They have been city folk going back millennia. The cultural roots are all the opposite. In fact, Jews were largely prohibited from owning farmland in Europe and were mainly restricted to living in cities so it is no surprise that they remain an urban people here in the US. They have no rural traditions at all.

So yes, moving into the cities and suburbs where 85% of Americans live is going to mean losing much of the unique cultural aspects of Anabaptism. I don’t think there is any way around that fundamental fact.

[Judas Maccabeus]

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.

But, is it desirable or even possible to reach the”masses.” I have seen my former denomination try to reach the “masses”:by watering down their message, to a point where the message is lost in the water of postmodernism of America culture.

Better a small and faithful church than one that is neither of these. As Robert pointed out above, it is a narrow way.

No because there are churches that do not water down the gospel, are very extreme in practice, and they fill many seats. Fundamental Baptists for example are a pretty extreme group. Yes, they may see some gospel teachings different but they will not water it down.

In fact, we Anabaptists water down completely the Great Commission. 1000% watered down. It's like a tea bag in a swimming pool.

You think the IFBs are growing? What planet are you living on? Most of my friends are IFB, mostly IFCA. They have completely lost the next generation.

[sojourner]

I don't think our success at spreading the gospel can purely be judged by numbers.
It is our job to get the message out but only God can move hearts.

Also, I don't fully understand the need to blast these "cornfield churches" as you call them.
Most churches I have attended were in or close to towns.
Even these "corn field" areas are quite populated with people.
As an evangelist minded individual that holds a full-time job, how many people do you interact with each day?
I'm not convinced that living in the biggest cities will somehow lead to more converts.
There is plenty of opportunity in these "corn fields" if we are intentional. But we are limited by time.
In reality, I think for some of us it is better to spend quality time with a few, than preach to the crowds.
As a wise teacher once said, "Do for one what you wish you could do for all".

I know its been said earlier in this thread but I echo the sentiment.
My goal is not to bring numbers from outside into our circles.
Our job is to point others to Jesus.
If they want to join CA they are certainly welcome but its not the end goal.
Raymond Burkholder from MTM ministries is a great example of what I envision for Anabaptists.
Empowering local leaders by preaching values not typically taught by western christianity.
In turn, those leaders can take those truths back to their home congregations.

[Ken]

I don't think our success at spreading the gospel can purely be judged by numbers.
It is our job to get the message out but only God can move hearts.

I think that is frankly a cop-out. How else do you judge success if not with thriving and growing churches?

And if no one is listening or paying attention then whose fault is that? Is it the fault of the messenger or God? Personally I don’t think it is God’s fault.

[Josh]

Which basically means that conservative Anabaptism is largely going to be limited to the 15% or so of the country (by population) that is rural or rural leaning.

This hasn't been the case. Most the converts in my church I can think of come from suburban or urban settings (myself included). Mennonites and Amish function as their own small villages; they aren't really comparable to what you think of as "rural America". They have their own civic and cultural institutions and indeed often share them with their rural and small-town neighbours, where those civic institutions are often dying.

For example, the volunteer fire dept. in Glenn, CA is almost entirely run by Mennonites. They also run the fundraisers, one of which has become a bit locally famous for doing a Brazilian supper fundraiser. The local people appreciate having a people group who is staying and even thriving in the area, which is otherwise is becoming depopulated, replaced by non-resident landowner-"farmers".

It is just another way of restating mrbilliam’s main thesis because the percentage of the population that is rural is low and declining. And it is not just for practical reasons. Rural life is deeply embedded in Anabaptist culture. Anabaptists (at least those who migrated to North America) have always been a rural people. And it isn’t just conservative Anabaptists my rural Menno kin who are not conservative all still have an enormous sense of superiority when it comes to rural life. My facebook feed was full of rural memes back when I was still following extended family on facebook. And I get it endlessly when we are together for reunions.

Conservative Anabaptists continue to be people who work the land and make productive use of the land - and they do this everywhere. They do it in Haiti, where Holdeman converts have been some of the few who have applied better techniques to grow food in places others though the soil was depleted and no good for farming anymore. In a place like Togo, they practice the same ancient techniques that have always been practiced there. They do not think it is good for their young people to move the big cities and see no reason to do so. In Canada, there are so many Anabaptists that they make up a large fraction of the people farming the prairies (alongside the vast operations in places like Nebraska and Kansas), which are the breadbasket for not just America but much of the world.

Growing food is not something that is going to go obsolete.

So yes, moving into the cities and suburbs where 85% of Americans live is going to mean losing much of the unique cultural aspects of Anabaptism.

Then it isn't worth doing.

I don’t think there is any way around that fundamental fact.

I don't really see anything about American suburban culture that is worth adopting. Do you?

[Josh]

I don't think our success at spreading the gospel can purely be judged by numbers.
It is our job to get the message out but only God can move hearts.

I think that is frankly a cop-out. How else do you judge success if not with thriving and growing churches?

And if no one is listening or paying attention then whose fault is that? I don’t think it is God’s fault.

If what you care about is percentage growth, then plain Anabaptism is amongst the most "successful" the world has ever seen.

[Ken]

Which basically means that conservative Anabaptism is largely going to be limited to the 15% or so of the country (by population) that is rural or rural leaning.

This hasn't been the case. Most the converts in my church I can think of come from suburban or urban settings (myself included). Mennonites and Amish function as their own small villages; they aren't really comparable to what you think of as "rural America". They have their own civic and cultural institutions and indeed often share them with their rural and small-town neighbours, where those civic institutions are often dying.

Today in 2024, what percentage of conservative Anabaptist churches would you say are located in rural areas versus suburban or urban?

We can look up church directories and count. But I’m curious what you think the number is.

[RZehr]

I don't think our success at spreading the gospel can purely be judged by numbers.
It is our job to get the message out but only God can move hearts.

I think that is frankly a cop-out. How else do you judge success if not with thriving and growing churches?

And if no one is listening or paying attention then whose fault is that? Is it the fault of the messenger or God? Personally I don’t think it is God’s fault.

Maybe it’s a cop-out, maybe it’s not. But one thing for sure, is that Christianity is not a popularity contest. And another thing it is not, is like Islam, where populations converted by force is a good thing.

[RZehr]

I have a few defenses and facts. But no really great excuses.
How few converts did Lot have in Sodom? How many did Noah have in the 120+ years of preaching?

They didn't have the Great Commission and did not know Jesus and his emphasis on it. They didn't have the Bible, and were more or less in a discovery period of who God was.

That said the Baptists, Methodists, Lutherans etc. (have millions and MILLIONSS of converts).

EDIT: I mean these guys didn't even have the 10 Commandments.... It was discovery faith time.

I don’t know about that. These were guys who very much knew who God was. Noah’s life over lapped with many of the earliest people. Lot was visited and talked with angels.

I think the reason the OT was even written, was because the first hand witnesses were dying off. I’m not sure they were trying to discover who God was.

As for the Great Commission, I think God did care that people obeyed him back then. I don’t think there was ever a time that God didn’t care, until the Great Commission.