What interpretations would lead to someone receiving "the ban" or excommunication from your church?

[readrevelations1to22]

I was reading an article and saw this:

In February 2014, the Weavers began to keep the Sabbath, and that August, they were baptized into the Seventh-day Adventist Church.

Their worst fears, however, came true. When the community found out, they were shunned. They were barred from attending community or family meetings and gatherings.

“The elders forbid everyone to even talk to us,” said Andy. “We were shunned from doing business with the community, and our kids were not allowed to keep attending Amish schools.”

This got me thinking about at what point does a different interpretation of scripture get someone excommunicated? Obviously within most churches there is going to be some variety of opinions on various interpretations, but when does it cross the line into ban territory? (Or not being allowed to join in the first place)

It seems to me that someone could agree with all the churches baptism vows but still come to form quite different interpretations of scripture.

If someone did the following things would they be excommunicated from your church, and if so which things would be the deal breaker?
-followed old testament dietary law such as not eating pork
-ritual washing before prayer at specific times
-holding a nontrinitarian view of God
-ritual fasting such as Yom Kippur or the month of Ramadan

Would it make a difference if the person practiced these things privately without pushing their views on others? And would it make a difference if their children practiced these things (especially for groups where the children attend a church school)?

This is an issue that I can imagine occurring with either Muslims or Jews who start reading the Gospel and come to agree with many Anabaptist principles such as pacifism, adult baptism, and so on but who interpret the Gospel with a strict monotheistic understanding and take the following into consideration with regard to many rules that modern Christians tend not to follow:

"“Do not think that I have come to abolish the Law or the Prophets; I have not come to abolish them but to fulfill them. For truly, I say to you, until heaven and earth pass away, not an iota, not a dot, will pass from the Law until all is accomplished. Therefore whoever relaxes one of the least of these commandments and teaches others to do the same will be called least in the kingdom of heaven, but whoever does them and teaches them will be called great in the kingdom of heaven." -Mathew 5:17-19

Besides your church, if you have insight on how this situation would be handled in any of the low tech Anabaptist groups such as the Michigan Amish Fellowship, German Baptist Brethren, Delano type churches, Old Order River Brethren, etc. that would be much appreciated

Link to news article quoted: https://adventistreview.org/news/we-are ... dventists/

[Anthony]

-followed old testament dietary law such as not eating pork
Not a deal breaker
-ritual washing before prayer at specific times
Not a deal breaker
-holding a nontrinitarian view of God
Could be problematic
-ritual fasting such as Yom Kippur or the month of Ramadan
Not a deal breaker

The actual “problem” with any of these would be the attitude you hold these positions with and if you tend to keep the peace within church. For example i have some views regarding evolution, attitude towards the bible, personal relationship with jesus, that are all totally foreign to my anabaptist church. I dont preach these views or expect anyone to adopt them so no one is offended and im safe to hold them.

I have heard some church brothers say some borderline heretical things regarding biblical inerrancy ( a very liberal position that the bible is just a bunch of metaphors and stories) in semi-private conversation and it didnt raise too much discomfort.

The line is when the private belief crosses over into acting differently than everyone else, or expecting people to conform to your new idea. You’ll notice that guy got shunned after joining a new church. He probably wouldnt of gotten shunned if he just privately held seventh day adventist views.

In essence, Its hard to get in trouble for believing the wrong thing, doing the wrong thing is where it becomes a problem.

[readrevelations1to22]

-followed old testament dietary law such as not eating pork
Not a deal breaker
-ritual washing before prayer at specific times
Not a deal breaker
-holding a nontrinitarian view of God
Could be problematic
-ritual fasting such as Yom Kippur or the month of Ramadan
Not a deal breaker

Thanks for the informative answer, and why do you think the nontrinitarian view could be problematic? It seems like out of the 4 things that view would be the least visible as it is not a belief that necessarily requires visible action.

In essence, Its hard to get in trouble for believing the wrong thing, doing the wrong thing is where it becomes a problem.

This makes a lot of sense.

When it comes to not eating pork or fasting I assume people would notice. Like if a married couple and their kids always decline pork at group meals people would figure out they hold a view against it. When the belief is so visible, it kinda falls in between "believing the wrong thing" and "doing the wrong thing" even if they didn't usually talk about that view. Do you think they could still keep the peace?

[R7ehr]

Of those listed, the non-Triniarian would certainly be the most likely to be a problem.
Any of the four could be a problem depending on the person and leadership, and how the interaction with the rest of the church went, but there would more likely a way to hold and practice the three others in ways that wouldn’t be a problem, and divisive.
In my opinion, the Trinitarian one would be something that more than likely would set one on an almost inevitable collision course. At least in the ultra and intermediate conservative churches. I don’t know about the Old Order or more liberal groups.

[JohnH]

If someone did the following things would they be excommunicated from your church, and if so which things would be the deal breaker?
-followed old testament dietary law such as not eating pork

Doing so would subject one to counsel and spiritual concern, but not excommunication (unless one started going around telling other people they shouldn't eat pork).

-ritual washing before prayer at specific times

I don't think anyone would care / notice.

-holding a nontrinitarian view of God

Our baptismal vows require upholding the 33 articles of faith in the Martyr's Mirror which express a standard, orthodox trintiarian view and christology. Attendance at communion is the same. I suppose one could simply lie their way through communion, but otherwise if one held such views one would need to abstain from communion. It would not lead to excommunication unless one went around expressing this view or trying to persuade others.

-ritual fasting such as Yom Kippur or the month of Ramadan

I don't think anyone would care, unless you said you were explicitly trying to perform Jewish or Muslim rituals. In that case I think it would just lead to spiritual concern but not excommunication.

Would it make a difference if the person practiced these things privately without pushing their views on others? And would it make a difference if their children practiced these things (especially for groups where the children attend a church school)?

Pushing these views on others would be an absolute no-no, including on one's own spouse. If you have children, you would be expected to raise the children with the church's teachings in matters of both doctrine and practice. Raising your children to have bizarre, non-Christian beliefs and practices would not be acceptable.

Overall, though, my church's general view on people who would adopt any of the above would be that they probably have a psychiatric disturbance and it would be pursued that way - mostly from experience that nearly everyone that adopts bizarre doctrines/practices usually is experiencing emotional/psychiatric difficulties. So it is handled that way in a very pastoral manner. Excommunication of such a person takes years, unless they are actively causing trouble for other church members (e.g. trying to force their wife to adopt such practices).

This is an issue that I can imagine occurring with either Muslims or Jews who start reading the Gospel and come to agree with many Anabaptist principles such as pacifism, adult baptism, and so on but who interpret the Gospel with a strict monotheistic understanding and take the following into consideration with regard to many rules that modern Christians tend not to follow:

"“Do not think that I have come to abolish the Law or the Prophets; I have not come to abolish them but to fulfill them. For truly, I say to you, until heaven and earth pass away, not an iota, not a dot, will pass from the Law until all is accomplished. Therefore whoever relaxes one of the least of these commandments and teaches others to do the same will be called least in the kingdom of heaven, but whoever does them and teaches them will be called great in the kingdom of heaven." -Mathew 5:17-19

As Christians, Anabaptists don't believe we follow the Old Testament law and in fact would teach against such. We would hold strongly to the teachings in Galatians. Anabaptists aren't really different than other Protestants, Catholics, or Eastern Orthodox in this regard. We all essentially have the same view of who Jesus, God, and the Holy Spirit are, and view salvation the same way - it is a free gift from Jesus where the only thing we have to do is accept Christ's gift and follow him, in order to receive that gift.

Besides your church, if you have insight on how this situation would be handled in any of the low tech Anabaptist groups such as the Michigan Amish Fellowship, German Baptist Brethren, Delano type churches, Old Order River Brethren, etc. that would be much appreciated

None of these churches would tolerate that kind of thing at all. My church would probably be a lot more sympathetic of it than those would be.

Delano offers zero degrees of freedom to differ from them on matters of doctrine at all, and that is generally true of successful Anabaptist churches that have a lot of seekers, because if they didn't, it becomes pure chaos with different members trying to promote their own doctrines. You would be viewed as a threat to the souls of the church and to be a very bad influence.

Link to news article quoted: https://adventistreview.org/news/we-are ... dventists/

Practicing 7th Day Adventists would be excommunicated from Amish churches and are not Amish, unless they consider "Amish" to just be an ethnic designation, like saying one is an "Irish Catholic" when one actually goes to a Protestant church.

I would add it is very sad to see this:

“Several Amish brothers are reading the Bible in English,” said Andy. “And they are reading [Adventist Church co-founder] Ellen G. White’s books.”

It is very sad to hear that Amish people are being influenced by a false prophetess.

Fundamentally - you cannot be an Anabaptist and hold to non-Anabaptist doctrines.

[JohnH]

Of those listed, the non-Triniarian would certainly be the most likely to be a problem.
Any of the four could be a problem depending on the person and leadership, and how the interaction with the rest of the church went, but there would more likely a way to hold and practice the three others in ways that wouldn’t be a problem, and divisive.
In my opinion, the Trinitarian one would be something that more than likely would set one on an almost inevitable collision course. At least in the ultra and intermediate conservative churches. I don’t know about the Old Order or more liberal groups.

I can't think of anywhere that would tolerate it. The "less conservative" groups are often more fundamentalist about doctrine and would expect people to hold strictly to their statement of faith. The "more conservative" groups would be concerned about someone who has a strong position that deviates from the standard, simply because that's usually a red flag. Old Orders would consider it a problem to have strongly held beliefs about doctrines at all.

A liberal-progressive church might have a little room to deviate from orthodox doctrine, but such a person would be on the fringes of things.

[Soloist]

Wife: it really depends on what you mean by non-Trinitarian View. If you don’t believe in the deity of Jesus, I don’t think any of the churches that we’ve gone to would allow you to be a member. Oneness or threeness ect would probably not be as big of a deal as long as you don’t think that He was just another angel/brother of Satan, etc.,and you believe in His deity. The other stuff they might talk to you about if it seems like you’re trying to save yourself through doing those things. Sabbatarian ism might be an issue. If you try to change the church service schedule, or are attending a non-Mennonite church on Saturdays (they might wonder why you’re going to two different churches and wanting to be a church member). Other than that if you don’t want to work on a Saturday, it would probably be OK as long as you don’t holier than thou about it. I don’t know if they would excommunicate for those things or not, but I think they would allow for personal conscience as long as you don’t think that’s what saves you or try to push it on other people.

Most Mennonite groups are different than Amish in that they don’t practice the ban to where they shun you. if you got excommunicated, you would not be able to take communion or have a part in church/ministry ect. You would probably just be treated like a nonmember although different people might have different convictions about hanging out with you. it’s hit or mess with different Anabaptist groups from Charity, etc..


It would probably be helpful to find a church and ask them because individual leadership will apply things differently. most Mennonite churches you cannot just walk in and become a member right away because they want you to know what you’re getting into and they also want to get to know you. most also don’t allow non-members to take communion.

[JohnH]

Horse and buggy groups generally have a much higher level of integration and community - that means a far less room to hold oddball doctrines.

I advise people with such doctrines to simply go to a church that teaches and encourages them.

[Soloist]

So I hold an obscure view on the Trinity that was talked about in the Ancient church and eventually branded heretical. The Mennonite churches I have been in have all accepted me but I know one pastor here in a less conservative church would strongly object to me being part.
I don’t believe it to be the only valid interpretation but more that I believe trinitarianism isn’t the right hill to die on. If you are curious you can either pm me or hunt down the threads on the Trinity where I’ve commented on it.
I also don’t make a deal of it and I don’t and can’t say the Trinity is wrong.

[readrevelations1to22]

Our baptismal vows require upholding the 33 articles of faith in the Martyr's Mirror which express a standard, orthodox trintiarian view and christology. Attendance at communion is the same. I suppose one could simply lie their way through communion, but otherwise if one held such views one would need to abstain from communion. It would not lead to excommunication unless one went around expressing this view or trying to persuade others.

If the baptismal vows directly require an affirmation of the trinity then certainly a sincere nontrinitarian could not take such vows. However while reading the baptism vows for other Anabaptist churches I did notice that quite a few could be agreed with even by a nontrinitarian. For example this quote from a different discussion:

1. Do you believe in one true, eternal, and almighty God, who is the Creator and Preserver of all things, visible and invisible?

2. Do you believe in Jesus Christ, as the only begotten Son of God, that He is the Saviour of mankind, that He died upon the cross as a ransom for our sins, and that through Him we have eternal life?

3. Do you believe in the Holy Ghost which proceeds from the Father, that He is an abiding Comforter; comforts us when we do right, and reproves us when we do wrong, and guides us in all truth?

The above baptism vows could be agreed with by many nontrinitarians even though the average person taking these vows holds a trinitarian view.

As for communion, I do not come from a formal church community background and am not familiar with what communion in this context is like, do they have to state certain phrases at communion that would make a nontrinitarian forced to not attend?

None of these churches would tolerate that kind of thing at all. My church would probably be a lot more sympathetic of it than those would be.

Delano offers zero degrees of freedom to differ from them on matters of doctrine at all, and that is generally true of successful Anabaptist churches that have a lot of seekers, because if they didn't, it becomes pure chaos with different members trying to promote their own doctrines. You would be viewed as a threat to the souls of the church and to be a very bad influence.

What about the Believers in Christ, Lobelville community as it was implied in a previous discussion that they have a uniquely simple membership process?

When you say Delano offers zero degrees of freedom to differ from them on matters of doctrine, would privately abstaining from foods such as pork, private washing/prayer, private fasting, and a silent nontrinitarian view (assuming that their baptism vows did not explicitly require the trinity) really put one into a situation where they viewed you as completely incompatible with them even if you openly agreed on many other things?

Fundamentally - you cannot be an Anabaptist and hold to non-Anabaptist doctrines.

If we look back to the very early Anabaptist movement there actually were some nontrinitarians, for example: Council of Venice 1550 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Council_of_Venice