Nonconformity, Nonresistance, Nonaccumulation

[Grace]

Roger is many things, but irresponsible isn’t one of them.

I am not saying he is irresponsible. But promoting a thinking that people shouldn't save for future needs is irresponsible.

[Soloist]

Roger is many things, but irresponsible isn’t one of them.

I am not saying he is irresponsible. But promoting a thinking that people shouldn't save for future needs is irresponsible.

There is a difference between saving for a future known need, and saving for an unknown need that may or may not happen.

Besides, let’s be realistic here… unless one is going to play the stock market, have IRA’s or the like, there is no way you can save enough.
I’m not denying the trend you see in family sizes but not every Mennonite church is that way, if you look at Steve Ebersole, he would be an example of what you say is the old way.
That being said most of the people in pilgrim don’t actually believe in non-accumulation the way Roger does.
The people who believe in non-accumulation we know are quiverfull and have large families.

[Ken]

I agree with Grace here.

There are expenses associated with retirement and becoming elderly. Not just the ordinary living expenses when one is too old to work, but also possible expenses associated with long term care. We are going through that right now with my wife's father who is 92 and unable to care for himself. Luckily they have money saved or we would be faced with the difficult decision of paying for elder care or helping pay for our daughters college education.

If you choose not to pay for it yourself through savings or insurance you are simply choosing to let the burden fall on others. Either the government, your children, or possibly your extended church community if they are even willing to take on that burden.

The reasoning behind not saving up for old age is that inflation can make a person's savings worth almost nothing. Rather than moths and rust corrupting the savings, it is inflation in our day and age. The money that I saved up as a young adult for old age might now be worth a day or two in the hospital. 25 years from now those savings might be worth a one or two hour stay in a hospital.

Well sure, if you just put coins under your mattress. We earn interest in order to compensate for inflation. The government actually has an inflation target of 2%. We no longer live in a Biblical age of gold and silver coinage that does not vary in value over time: https://www.investopedia.com/financial- ... 2426%2C000.

A single $10,000 investment at age 20 would grow to over $70,000 by the time the investor was 60 years old (based on a 5% interest rate). That same $10,000 investment made at age 30 would yield about $43,000 by age 60, and made at age 40 would yield only $26,000.

Hertzler makes this same point in his book, if only to argue against it. His only answer to the question of who will pay for expenses in old age is to deliberately dump it on his children which I cannot agree with in this day and age. From page 82:

Explain to your children your convictions regarding finances.
Explain to them that you believe in the doctrine of
nonaccumulation, and thus you are not planning to lay
anything aside for your old age. Tell them that although
you hope to be able to work enough to provide for your
own needs right up until the day you die, there may come a
day when you can no longer do so. And in that case,
according to 1 Timothy 5:8, the primary responsibility for
your provision will fall on them. (When this verse speaks of
providing for your own, it is referring to taking care of the
older generation, not the younger one.)

[Josh]

For example, Eastern Mennonite Missions (Not to be confused with EPMC) used to be one of the strongest Plain Anabaptist missions. About 10 years ago they donated their library to a moderate conservative Anabaptist mission and the library is now in our house basement.

Could you expand on this a little bit? I was a missionary for 4 years with EMM starting 17 years ago and it was a never particularly plain. It's always been the mission board of Lancaster Conference and mapped pretty closely with the movement of the conference. Do you know why the donated their library?

What about 50 years ago?

[Soloist]

I agree with Grace here.

There are expenses associated with retirement and becoming elderly. Not just the ordinary living expenses when one is too old to work, but also possible expenses associated with long term care. We are going through that right now with my wife's father who is 92 and unable to care for himself. Luckily they have money saved or we would be faced with the difficult decision of paying for elder care or helping pay for our daughters college education.

If you choose not to pay for it yourself through savings or insurance you are simply choosing to let the burden fall on others. Either the government, your children, or possibly your extended church community if they are even willing to take on that burden.

The reasoning behind not saving up for old age is that inflation can make a person's savings worth almost nothing. Rather than moths and rust corrupting the savings, it is inflation in our day and age. The money that I saved up as a young adult for old age might now be worth a day or two in the hospital. 25 years from now those savings might be worth a one or two hour stay in a hospital.

Well sure, if you just put coins under your mattress. We earn interest in order to compensate for inflation. The government actually has an inflation target of 2%. We no longer live in a Biblical age of gold and silver coinage that does not vary in value over time: https://www.investopedia.com/financial- ... 2426%2C000.

A single $10,000 investment at age 20 would grow to over $70,000 by the time the investor was 60 years old (based on a 5% interest rate). That same $10,000 investment made at age 30 would yield about $43,000 by age 60, and made at age 40 would yield only $26,000.

Hertzler makes this same point in his book, if only to argue against it. His only answer to the question of who will pay for expenses in old age is to deliberately dump it on his children which I cannot agree with in this day and age. From page 82:

Explain to your children your convictions regarding finances.
Explain to them that you believe in the doctrine of
nonaccumulation, and thus you are not planning to lay
anything aside for your old age. Tell them that although
you hope to be able to work enough to provide for your
own needs right up until the day you die, there may come a
day when you can no longer do so. And in that case,
according to 1 Timothy 5:8, the primary responsibility for
your provision will fall on them. (When this verse speaks of
providing for your own, it is referring to taking care of the
older generation, not the younger one.)

Wife: well, if this is all going to be Hertzler centric, they wouldn’t actually be against Medicaid/Medicare ect, and they definitely provide a lot for their children before that, and would be offering the same to their parents.

The whole point of non-accumulation is to be helping others and not hoarding the money for yourself. there’s also the possibility, however big or small, that your money will end up being worthless at some point anyway because of some government crisis, in which case it would have been better invested in the kingdom anyway. whether someone wants to take it to his level or not, it’s still a valid point to think about.

[HondurasKeiser]

For example, Eastern Mennonite Missions (Not to be confused with EPMC) used to be one of the strongest Plain Anabaptist missions. About 10 years ago they donated their library to a moderate conservative Anabaptist mission and the library is now in our house basement.

Could you expand on this a little bit? I was a missionary for 4 years with EMM starting 17 years ago and it was a never particularly plain. It's always been the mission board of Lancaster Conference and mapped pretty closely with the movement of the conference. Do you know why the donated their library?

What about 50 years ago?

Was LMC, and thus EMBM&C considered plain 50 years ago? 1974? If they were it was just barely plain. Indeed, I've heard over the years that one of the reasons Lancaster and Franconia moved away from their plainness in the 50's and 60's in such a rapid way was because of the influence of missionaries. The same is true for the Mennonite Church here in Honduras. Coverings and plainer dress were common here through the 60's and 70's but the old folk relate that suddenly the missionaries started showing up without coverings so most of the women here took theirs off too.

[Ken]

I agree with Grace here.

There are expenses associated with retirement and becoming elderly. Not just the ordinary living expenses when one is too old to work, but also possible expenses associated with long term care. We are going through that right now with my wife's father who is 92 and unable to care for himself. Luckily they have money saved or we would be faced with the difficult decision of paying for elder care or helping pay for our daughters college education.

If you choose not to pay for it yourself through savings or insurance you are simply choosing to let the burden fall on others. Either the government, your children, or possibly your extended church community if they are even willing to take on that burden.

The reasoning behind not saving up for old age is that inflation can make a person's savings worth almost nothing. Rather than moths and rust corrupting the savings, it is inflation in our day and age. The money that I saved up as a young adult for old age might now be worth a day or two in the hospital. 25 years from now those savings might be worth a one or two hour stay in a hospital.

Well sure, if you just put coins under your mattress. We earn interest in order to compensate for inflation. The government actually has an inflation target of 2%. We no longer live in a Biblical age of gold and silver coinage that does not vary in value over time: https://www.investopedia.com/financial- ... 2426%2C000.

A single $10,000 investment at age 20 would grow to over $70,000 by the time the investor was 60 years old (based on a 5% interest rate). That same $10,000 investment made at age 30 would yield about $43,000 by age 60, and made at age 40 would yield only $26,000.

Hertzler makes this same point in his book, if only to argue against it. His only answer to the question of who will pay for expenses in old age is to deliberately dump it on his children which I cannot agree with in this day and age. From page 82:

Explain to your children your convictions regarding finances.
Explain to them that you believe in the doctrine of
nonaccumulation, and thus you are not planning to lay
anything aside for your old age. Tell them that although
you hope to be able to work enough to provide for your
own needs right up until the day you die, there may come a
day when you can no longer do so. And in that case,
according to 1 Timothy 5:8, the primary responsibility for
your provision will fall on them. (When this verse speaks of
providing for your own, it is referring to taking care of the
older generation, not the younger one.)

Wife: well, if this is all going to be Hertzler centric, they wouldn’t actually be against Medicaid/Medicare ect, and they definitely provide a lot for their children before that, and would be offering the same to their parents.

The whole point of non-accumulation is to be helping others and not hoarding the money for yourself. there’s also the possibility, however big or small, that your money will end up being worthless at some point anyway because of some government crisis, in which case it would have been better invested in the kingdom anyway. whether someone wants to take it to his level or not, it’s still a valid point to think about.

I entirely agree with de-emphasizing wealth and wealth accumulation. Both from a Christian perspective and from a general societal perspective. A society that coddles and rewards billionaires is obscene.

That said, I think churches can also be overly focused on wealth and finances as well. How many obscenely wealthy churches are there in the world?
Yes I understand tithing. But in most cases, what the kingdom actually needs is us and not our checks. I don't have all the answers but I disagree with the notion that one should do no planning for the future and simply dump all our future expenses on our children. Just like we don't know what life holds for us, we don't know what it holds for them either.

[Grace]

I agree with Grace here.

There are expenses associated with retirement and becoming elderly. Not just the ordinary living expenses when one is too old to work, but also possible expenses associated with long term care. We are going through that right now with my wife's father who is 92 and unable to care for himself. Luckily they have money saved or we would be faced with the difficult decision of paying for elder care or helping pay for our daughters college education.

If you choose not to pay for it yourself through savings or insurance you are simply choosing to let the burden fall on others. Either the government, your children, or possibly your extended church community if they are even willing to take on that burden

Thanks Ken. We have walked the road of parents needing care that was way beyond our capacity to give. Your last paragraph is so true. We know of instances where the elderly parents needed intense medical care for a lengthy period of time. The parent was in a care facility and eventually the money ran out. There were some of the children that could have covered the cost by draining their savings for their future. Some of the children simply were not financially able to help provide the cost to cover the care. So the parent went on Medicaid (the government).

As you said, In the end, when there isn't enough saved up for end of life expenses, the burden will fall on the children, the church, or the government.

[Ken]

I agree with Grace here.

There are expenses associated with retirement and becoming elderly. Not just the ordinary living expenses when one is too old to work, but also possible expenses associated with long term care. We are going through that right now with my wife's father who is 92 and unable to care for himself. Luckily they have money saved or we would be faced with the difficult decision of paying for elder care or helping pay for our daughters college education.

If you choose not to pay for it yourself through savings or insurance you are simply choosing to let the burden fall on others. Either the government, your children, or possibly your extended church community if they are even willing to take on that burden

Thanks Ken. We have walked the road of parents needing care that was way beyond our capacity to give. Your last paragraph is so true. We know of instances where the elderly parents needed intense medical care for a lengthy period of time. The parent was in a care facility and eventually the money ran out. There were some of the children that could have covered the cost by draining their savings for their future. Some of the children simply were not financially able to help provide the cost to cover the care. So the parent went on Medicaid (the government).

As you said, In the end, when there isn't enough saved up for end of life expenses, the burden will fall on the children, the church, or the government.

There is no small amount of hypocrisy involved in refusing to save for one's own future while expecting others to do it for you.

Where does Hertzler think his children are going to get the money to pay for his elder care if not from THEIR own savings? Expenses like long-term care are not something most people are in a position to pay for on a month-to-month basis out of their paychecks. My wife and I are not poor. But we don't have the resources to pay for expensive long-term care or medical care for our parents out of our month-to-month paychecks. Especially if they weren't on Medicare or didn't have insurance. We would most certainly have to tap deep into our savings.

[Soloist]

There is no small amount of hypocrisy involved in refusing to save for one's own future while expecting others to do it for you.

Where does Hertzler think his children are going to get the money to pay for his elder care if not from THEIR own savings? Expenses like long-term care are not something most people are in a position to pay for on a month-to-month basis out of their paychecks. My wife and I are not poor. But we don't have the resources to pay for long-term care for our parents out of our month-to-month paychecks. We would most certainly have to tap deep into our savings.

Some people share now expecting nothing in return, some people spend now expecting future giving, some people save for their future.

What does Jesus tell us to do?

Do we save for an uncertain future?
Give for the present needs?
Try to do both?
Can anyone honestly save enough to pay for their needs without using the stock market either through IRA’s or some other form?
Anything guaranteed or safe isn’t going to have the yields you need.