What has to happen? Reforming our culture

[Josh]

The idea of discipline or accountability being some thing the "leadership team" does after certain folks are told on or complained against, will make for poisonous relationships all the way around a terrible church brotherhood. Mutual accountability and a flat hierarchy are much better.

As a seeker and a new person to Mennonite circles, I don’t get to decide “this is how things should be done”.

I have gone public with some things here on MennoNet that needed take care to “the whole church”. Exactly how has that been received?

[RZehr]

Either we believe it is the correct way to operate or we don’t.
For me, I want to do it. And if, as you mentioned, a church decision is actually just a “church” decision, meaning it really isn’t a church decision, well that is a church problem, not a Matt 18 procedural error which in turn means we can’t practice Matt 18.
Matt 18 is right. And if people botch it, that is a people problem that isn’t fixable by tinkering with Matt 18 or making procedural loop holes and work arounds in leu of fixing the people.

For what it’s worth I’ve practiced Matthew 18 several times.

A few questions:

(1) Why do most Mennonites tell me to just “drop it” or “let it go”? (RZehr, you may remember giving me this advice when we met in Brisbane.)

As I remember it, you were no longer a member of that church, nor even attending there anymore. So the question was and is, if a wrong doer is not in my church group let alone my congregation, is there really any realistic way to implement Matt 18 in any practical sense?

I don’t see how it can work, and it really highlights the necessity and practical importance of church membership (of some type at minimum).

Without being in the same church I hardly see how we can:
1 agree that we are for sure brothers
2 agree that the one or two I bringing along are brothers
3 agree what church he ought to come before
4 agree how to put him out of a church he isn’t part of.

(2) Exactly how does one practice Matthew 18 with Jeriah Mast and CAM? I can’t fly down to Haiti to follow the Matt. 18 process, and CAM wouldn’t return my phone calls. Yet I’ve been asked multiple times by folks why I won’t follow Matthew 18.

The church is supposed to be the one sending missionaries, not para Church organizations.
CAM isn’t a church, therefore Matt 18 can’t work here. These are the types of problems we run into with all the para church non profits that are proliferating in our circles.

Even though I had no knowledge of the specific cases in Brisbane, I didn’t criticize you for making issues known. I think we should make things known. I just felt, and still do believe that after something is made known, my (or in this case your) responsibility is done. There is a point where nothing more can be done by ourselves.

[Josh]

As I remember it, you were no longer a member of that church, nor even attending there anymore. So the question was and is, if a wrong doer is not in my church group let alone my congregation, is there really any realistic way to implement Matt 18 in any practical sense?

I don’t see how it can work, and it really highlights the necessity and practical importance of church membership (of some type at minimum).

Without being in the same church I hardly see how we can:
1 agree that we are for sure brothers
2 agree that the one or two I bringing along are brothers
3 agree what church he ought to come before
4 agree how to put him out of a church he isn’t part of.

I guess it depends on if one believes in a broad church or just one’s own “one true church” (I believe the latter these days, partly for the reasons shown above).

The church is supposed to be the one sending missionaries, not para Church organizations.
CAM isn’t a church, therefore Matt 18 can’t work here. These are the types of problems we run into with all the para church non profits that are proliferating in our circles.

Agreed.

Even though I had no knowledge of the specific cases in Brisbane, I didn’t criticize you for making issues known. I think we should make things known. I just felt, and still do believe that after something is made known, my (or in this case your) responsibility is done. There is a point where nothing more can be done by ourselves.

In that case I was contacted by victim(s) and dealing with still-active member(s). It seemed wrong to ignore that.

It is worth noting the only consistent advice I get is to “let it go”. Which, given how I’ve been treated the last 4 years, is tempting at times.

We have a culture that is good on “letting it go”, and now we have a culture rife with systemic abuse, cover ups for that, and in a panic realising just how bad it is.

[Hats Off]

Painting with a pretty broad brush - making indefensible statements. Josh, exaggeration is not much different from lies.

[Neto]

Malaria.
Malaria is a serious problem in much of the world. Some people make sure they live on the third floor or higher, because mosquitoes don’t fly that high, so unless they come up the elevator with you, they won’t bother you. They are either smug about their place on the third floor, or maybe even feel sorry for the people on the lower levels, and say “If they really cared about their children, they would move up higher.”
Others try to be sure that no one who has malaria comes into their house. “The problem”, they say, “is not the mosquito, or even the virus, but the carrier. If those people who have malaria would just stay way from us, there would be no danger.”
“If we could just wipe out all of the anopheles mosquitoes, then we wouldn’t have this problem.” (goes another line of thought) “We need need to drain all of the swamps, and get rid of old tires & other stuff that holds stagnant water.”
“Actually, malaria is manageable. Just keep quinine and cloriquine on hand, and you’ll be OK.”
“No, you need to avoid getting it in the first place. After all, you never really get over it. Anytime you’re stressed or weakened a bit health-wise, it’ll come back. If you are smart, you’ll use lots of repellent, or take garlic pills if you don’t like the idea of spreading poison all over your body. (You can even just wear a clove of garlic on a string around your neck – that’ll do the trick. The mosquitoes will go for the other people, bless their hearts.)”

What point is the best at which to stop “malaria”?

[steve-in-kville]

Malaria.

At first I thought you were posting in the wrong thread. Then I thought you might have been delirious. Then I had some coffee and I got it. Very well done. Makes for a good parallel.

[Neto]

I'm going to just pull this back to the top, and refer to the thread on Joshua Harris, because I would like to hear the thoughts of others in respect to 'complementarianism' vs 'eglaterianism'. As I stated in that thread, I can see how abusive behavior within a marriage (or other adult relationships) might be covered up under the guise of complementarianism. But does that mean that complentarianism is wrong? (I am not personally doubting this - I just think it is a case of something true being misused to cover up or justify a sin. But I would still like to hear input from others on this.)

[Hats Off]

Are those two big words Josh Harris terms? We have to first inform our culture before we (I) can say what I think.

[ohio jones]

Are those two big words Josh Harris terms? We have to first inform our culture before we (I) can say what I think.

'Complementarianism' and 'egaliterianism' are common labels in the evangelical world, and among evangelical-influenced Anabaptists. The moderate complementarian point of view is summarized in the Danvers Statement. I'm not aware of a corresponding summary statement from the egalitarian point of view, but the Wikipedia description may be helpful.

[Hats Off]

Thanks, OJ. I will now also read the Danvers Statement. This was written before I read your post.

So I quickly informed myself and can explain my thoughts quickly and thoroughly by quoting Tim Challies

The primary reason I am not egalitarian is because I believe the position fails to withstand serious biblical scrutiny. Certainly it can prevail on a popular or emotional level, but I see no way for it to overcome on a biblical level. The complexity of words like ezer and phrases like mutual submission are far more easily resolved by complementarians than “I do not permit a woman to teach or to have authority over a man” is for egalitarians. Paul’s appeals to Adam’s priority in the order of creation, the distinct male focus in the qualifications of an elder, the extended teaching on marriage in Ephesians 5, the deep mystery and metaphor within marriage—all of these provide challenges to the egalitarian position that I consider insurmountable.

Second to that, I am not egalitarian because complementarianism has proven itself to me.

https://www.challies.com/articles/why-i ... alitarian/
This really makes sense to me and describes my feeling.

I would suggest that full out egalitarianism would lend itself to all out abuse of any kind. A man with that outlook can easily fall into that trap. I have often been somewhat uncomfortable when old men teach young women in a wedding sermon how to be in proper submission to the husband while only mentioning the husband's role almost as an afterthought. I would think that too many Anabaptist leaders have adopted somewhat of an egalitarian approach which can help create the problems that we have been discussing and create the need to reform our culture.