Interested in learning about Holdemans

[JohnH]

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

Instead of worrying about church rules, committees, documents, and resolutions, some of us simply choose to trust God and to allow Jesus to shepherd and guide his church.

I am not personally worried about future interviews in the future. If they do happen, they could very well be God's way of spiritually guiding me and keeping me from danger. I am not sure why you are worried about them, either.

Are you concerned that not enough Mennonite churches and members in the 1970s went liberal? Would you like there to be more lukewarm Christians assimilated to the world? What exactly are you asking for?

[ken_sylvania]

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.

Can you honestly say that the COGIC Mennonite is the only visible representation of Jesus' church on earth?

[MattY]

"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.

The "One True Church" doctrine as held by COGICM is in fact a distinctive feature of the Restorationist movements of the 1800s (both the heretical groups like Jehovah's Witnesses and orthodox ones like the Churches of Christ), and it should be evaluated in that light, and as such it is, in fact, thoroughly modernist.

[JohnH]

The "One True Church" doctrine as held by COGICM is in fact a distinctive feature of the Restorationist movements of the 1800s (both the heretical groups like Jehovah's Witnesses and orthodox ones like the Churches of Christ),

The Jehovah's Witnesses emerged in the 1900s.

The first OTVC Mennonite group was started by John Herr in 1817, and predates Restorationism.

The chief influences on John Holdeman were early Anabaptist writers who tended to have an OTVC viewpoint, along with Claes Ganlof's "The United Undivided Church of God" (written in the 1500s, so admittedly possibly modernist being from that time period).

and it should be evaluated in that light, and as such it is, in fact, thoroughly modernist.

The "One True Church" doctrine is also held by basically every denomination before the Enlightenment, such as the Roman Catholic Church, the Eastern Orthodox church, and all the various other apostolic denominations.

It has its origins in the Bible talking about, well, one baptism, one faith, one Lord, etc.

In addition, things like church discipline simply do not make sense outside of a concept of a united, undivided church of God, and is one of the problems that plagues Anabaptists today: endless divisions, and when people don't like the church discipline in one group, they simply find a slightly-less conservative group and then go there with a sob story about the group they left, which is often some kind of tale about how that group "doesn't believe in the new birth", "only believes in rules", "thinks works will get you into heaven", and so forth. (As a matter of full disclosure, the Holdemans are not immune to having members matriculate in who have such stories about the Amish; since the Holdemans now are more conservative in practice than the Old Order Amish, though, we no longer get any members from that background.)

[JohnH]

Can you honestly say that the COGIC Mennonite is the only visible representation of Jesus' church on earth?

I think it's clear from scripture that there is only one united, undivided church, and I think that church should be visible. I don't think "the church" is some subset of people sitting in the pews at all kinds of random "churches", because that group of people don't or can't do the things that the New Testament clearly says the church does do.

I think every believer should labour to either find a true church that follows what is in the New Testament, or else labour to ensure their own congregation is a true church. I think if one's church is busy telling everyone "We aren't the true church, and in fact attending any other church is just fine," that there is a serious problem. And I think a lot of congregations and denominations out there are obviously false - they are not following what the New Testament describes they should do.

Beyond that, my responsibility and duty is to ensure my own congregation is a true church, and then I have an even more limited responsibility to ensure other congregations we are in fellowship with are true churches. The best way to do that is to be a responsible church member, and to uplift and encourage other members, and occasionally admonish them.

I think every one else here who wants to follow Jesus should do the same. With that said, I do believe in a one, true visible church doctrine, although I prefer the term "united, undivided church of God", and I hope the rest of you, if you don't believe in it now, at least long for and hope for it in the future.

[Anthony]

Most conservative churches got created by splitting and just remaining conservative by letting members leave, the church wide panels seemed to have worked, but other churches got the same result from splitting from the liberals. I dont believe in a OTC doctrine, but i can imagine it must of been traumatizing for a roving band of ministry to examine your entire church and pote ntially put you under the ban, not only cutting you off from your family but damning you to hell.

The OTC doctrine is maybe the key part that makes it scary, most people dont describe Swartzentruber shunnings with the same level of trauma.

[Anthony]

“The holdemans are now more conservative than the OOA, so we dont get any members from them anymore”. Can you elaborate on this? Dont the OOA have buggies and no phones? Holdemans have smartphones and almost every modern amenity besides unrestricted internet ( to my knowledge ).

[MattY]

The "One True Church" doctrine as held by COGICM is in fact a distinctive feature of the Restorationist movements of the 1800s (both the heretical groups like Jehovah's Witnesses and orthodox ones like the Churches of Christ),

The Jehovah's Witnesses emerged in the 1900s.

The first OTVC Mennonite group was started by John Herr in 1817, and predates Restorationism.

The chief influences on John Holdeman were early Anabaptist writers who tended to have an OTVC viewpoint, along with Claes Ganlof's "The United Undivided Church of God" (written in the 1500s, so admittedly possibly modernist being from that time period).

and it should be evaluated in that light, and as such it is, in fact, thoroughly modernist.

The "One True Church" doctrine is also held by basically every denomination before the Enlightenment, such as the Roman Catholic Church, the Eastern Orthodox church, and all the various other apostolic denominations.

It has its origins in the Bible talking about, well, one baptism, one faith, one Lord, etc.

In addition, things like church discipline simply do not make sense outside of a concept of a united, undivided church of God, and is one of the problems that plagues Anabaptists today: endless divisions, and when people don't like the church discipline in one group, they simply find a slightly-less conservative group and then go there with a sob story about the group they left, which is often some kind of tale about how that group "doesn't believe in the new birth", "only believes in rules", "thinks works will get you into heaven", and so forth. (As a matter of full disclosure, the Holdemans are not immune to having members matriculate in who have such stories about the Amish; since the Holdemans now are more conservative in practice than the Old Order Amish, though, we no longer get any members from that background.)

The difference is those old denominations (RC and EO) pair it with Apostolic Succession and trace their institutional continuity all the way back to the Apostles. And so their claims have at least a little more weight than someone forming a new institution in the 1800s and declaring it to be the only visible representation of the Body of Christ on earth. That's the Restorationist movement claim.

I do affirm one Lord, one faith, one baptism. In fact, I can affirm there is no salvation outside the Church, the Body of Christ. Can you? I affirm every Holdeman church is a visible outpost of the true Church. You apparently cannot do the same for Beachy churches or anyone else.

[JohnL]

Restorationists. One True Church groups.
Wow. This is unexplored territory for me. I’ve got some serious reading to do.

[joshuabgood]

The one true church doctrine stretches credulity to the max. The only churches that have any semblance of an argument to this are the EO or RC. And those are frankly not compelling at all to me...even as one who is sympathetic to their traditions. As soon as you get pope's excommunicating eachother it throws major questions into the works.

The Holdeman church would be better off just rejecting that asap.