Interested in learning about Holdemans

[Anthony]

Interesting, reminds me of maoist self critique sessions. I think its compatible with anabaptism, though the Holdeman church always gives me strange vibes. I find the Swartzentrubers more normal than the Holdemans.

[JohnH]

Interesting, reminds me of maoist self critique sessions. I think its compatible with anabaptism, though the Holdeman church always gives me strange vibes. I find the Swartzentrubers more normal than the Holdemans.

It’s not the same thing at all, and in any case, this happened over 50 years ago and hasn’t happened since.

[Anthony]

https://wunruh.substack.com/p/the-purge ... ever-ended

For some reason I was reading this ex-holdeman substack today and he has a very different view of the panels. He frames it as a church-wide audit done to literally every member. If they showed hesitation or disagreement from the church discipline he was excommunicated.

The way JohnH framed it, it sounded like a consensual church audit requested by concerned members. This substack makes it sound like a stalin-like purge. Not sure which version is more accurate, but this substack sounds a bit more accurate. Its funny that even with this purge the holdeman church is still moderately conservative in regards to tech and clothing standards. But they hold to rigid theological ideas about salvation and one true church… more fundamentalist than I imagined.

[JohnH]

https://wunruh.substack.com/p/the-purge ... ever-ended

For some reason I was reading this ex-holdeman substack today and he has a very different view of the panels. He frames it as a church-wide audit done to literally every member. If they showed hesitation or disagreement from the church discipline he was excommunicated.

I would not consider ex-members a 100% reliable source. Consider what ex-members (particularly excommunicants) from your own congregation or denomination tend to say about it.

The way JohnH framed it, it sounded like a consensual church audit requested by concerned members.

Most of my information about it based on talking people who were present at them, such as my father in law, mother in law, and basically everyone over the age of 60 at my own congregation.

It is, essentially, one of the few examples of a conservative-liberal division where the conservatives retained control of the church buildings and the overall institution. I am not sure why this is so offensive to so many present-day conservative Anabaptists. I don't think it would have been a good thing if people who disregarded the covering and nonresistance had been allowed to remain as church members.

This substack makes it sound like a stalin-like purge. Not sure which version is more accurate, but this substack sounds a bit more accurate.

I suppose it's possible that people like my father in law, mother in law, etc. are all either very skillful liars or are else in a prolonged state of delusion, but I doubt it

Its funny that even with this purge the holdeman church is still moderately conservative in regards to tech and clothing standards. But they hold to rigid theological ideas about salvation and one true church… more fundamentalist than I imagined.

The Holdemans have never held to rigid styles of clothing standards, which I think is a good thing; bad ideas like imposing rigidity about the plain coat, the cape dress or see-through mesh caps never happened in Holdeman circles, like they did during the wave of fundamentalism in the Lancaster Conference in the early 1900s.

"One True Church" is not fundamentalist-modernist (and Holdemans are not either); indeed, the very idea that one should not engage with religion as some kind of "free agent" to just freely float between church affiliations and choose what feels right to one's self is about as anti-modernist as it gets, and is probably why most present-day Westerners (who are almost all modernist and classically liberal in their thinking about such things) simply cannot understand Holdemans, strict-shunning Amish groups, Swartzentrubers, and so on.

Anyway, going back to that guy's Substack:

Alongside the economic drift a theological one was developing. In the late 1960s a movement emerged within Holdeman congregations suggesting that genuine Christians — true brethren, kingdom Christians — might exist in other denominations. That God might be working outside the institution’s walls. That salvation was not exclusively available through membership in the Church of God in Christ, Mennonite.

This was never official church doctrine, although in the some individuals held this view. I think there is often confusion between the idea of the door of salvation being exclusive to the church for all human beings versus merely the question of forfeiting one's salvation if one leaves our church. Those are not the same thing. Nonetheless, this is a repeated mistruth I see ex-members perpetrate. (I do not hold to this view, everyone knows I don't hold to this view, my ministry doesn't hold to this view. Occasionally you run into an old geezer who holds to this view and expresses annoyance that people don't really tolerate it anymore.)

Greeley

The most documented single event of the purge was in Greeley, Colorado.

In a single action the traveling panel excommunicated the entire congregation — except four members.

Four.

This also isn't accurate. What happened at Greeley is revival ministers showed up for revival meetings, just like any other congregation, and the congregation refused to accept them. This actually started in the 1950s, along the same time as every other Mennonite church was liberalising. Over a process of years, more conservative families started to leave the congregation until the whole membership that was left was interested in liberalising. Eventually, the remaining membership was excommunicated, mostly by a refusal to talk to the rest of the church conference over a period of years.

I stopped by to visit some Greeley people around 8 years ago; most of them are quite elderly now. The Greeley church almost immediately dropped the headcovering. Eventually they affiliated with MC USA; later on they became independent. Then they switched to FEC. The church's membership shrank as young people did not stay. FEC tried establishing a mission there but eventually abandoned it. They joined another non-Anabaptist small denomination called Crossway more recently in 2021 before finally permanently closing.

I am not interested in being part of a church like that.

[barnhart]

I know people who faced this in late 80's / early 90's. They didn't want to leave but couldn't honestly say the COGIC mennonite church is the only visible representation on earth.

[R7ehr]

It makes sense that if you make something like this a litmus test, and then put real teeth to it by requiring each person to affirm it, and excommunicating everyone who doesn’t individually affirm it, that the issue stays unchallenged for a really long time after that - both as a group doctrine and individually.
After all, every person still in has affirmed it, and it would be really difficult to later say that they believe otherwise.

[JohnH]

I know people who faced this in late 80's / early 90's. They didn't want to leave but couldn't honestly say the COGIC mennonite church is the only visible representation on earth.

Well, then the Holdeman church isn't a good fit for them. There are a great deal of churches, including Anabaptist ones, to choose from that don't hold to this doctrine.

It makes sense that if you make something like this a litmus test, and then put real teeth to it by requiring each person to affirm it, and excommunicating everyone who doesn’t individually affirm it, that the issue stays unchallenged for a really long time after that - both as a group doctrine and individually.
After all, every person still in has affirmed it, and it would be really difficult to later say that they believe otherwise.

Hasn't that been the case with other Anabaptist churches? I mean, is it somehow a problem to expect people to affirm and uphold the church's doctrines and practices?

[R7ehr]

If it was so humdrum normal, why has the church decided never to do it again?

[JohnH]

If it was so humdrum normal, why has the church decided never to do it again?

Instead of letting problems build up for years, it is instead now the practice to try to deal with potential issues throughout the year, and then to make sure a quality set of revival meetings is happening once a year, and that ongoing problems are fully dealt with at each set of revivals.

The practice in the 60s/early 70s was basically becoming very similar to other Mennonite groups as they transitioned to liberalism. Many people just routinely ignored church standards and practices and assumed their family position or business prominence was enough to "skate" through annual communion.

To quote one (former) member... "I know none of the ministers here will do anything, since they all owe me money and the rest of the membership does." The panel was not persuaded by this line of reasoning.

[Judas Maccabeus]

Interesting, reminds me of maoist self critique sessions. I think its compatible with anabaptism, though the Holdeman church always gives me strange vibes. I find the Swartzentrubers more normal than the Holdemans.

It’s not the same thing at all, and in any case, this happened over 50 years ago and hasn’t happened since.

Bur could happen any day now. Has it actually been officially renounced?