The Anabaptists Today & Tomorrow

[Pilgrim 33]

I am sincerely interested in learning more of what the Anabaptists; specifically, the Amish and the Mennonites, believe today and, also, what their customs are and how modern society has impacted both those beliefs and customs.

Please bear in mind, I'm not interested in the what or how or why these beliefs and customs were formed or how they have evolved over the centuries but, rather, what the beliefs, customs and situations are as they are currently faced with.

Finally, with the above as a backdrop, insiders' perspectives on the future of those beliefs and customs in a changing and shrinking world would be very much appreciated.

In advance, I thank you all for your kind, thoughtful and considered beliefs and opinions.

 

[Servant of the Kingdom]

There is a good forum at anabaptistbooks.com that is moderated by a conservative mennonite.

 

[Crazy Liz]

Most Mennonites today don't look much different from other evangelical denoms. Some still teach nonresistance (I can explain the difference between nonresistance and pacifism if you are interested) but many only keep it as part of their statement of faith as an accommodation to their more traditional members.

Anabaptist theology emphasizes the primacy of scripture, as interpreted by the whole congregation together. Emphasis is on practice. Whereas many protestants (especially our Reformed Baptist friends, since I see a lot of them here) tend to use Romans as the lens through which they read an dinterpret all of scripture, Anabaptist theology tends to think of the Sermon on the Mount as their key scripture.

 

[Pilgrim 33]

There is a good forum at anabaptistbooks.com that is moderated by a conservative mennonite.

The site's author is undoubtedly a very kind and devoted individual and the bookstore a wealth of information but, alas, the messageboard appears to be an ongoing work in progress.

 

[Pilgrim 33]

Most Mennonites today don't look much different from other evangelical denoms. Some still teach nonresistance (I can explain the difference between nonresistance and pacifism if you are interested) but many only keep it as part of their statement of faith as an accommodation to their more traditional members.

Anabaptist theology emphasizes the primacy of scripture, as interpreted by the whole congregation together. Emphasis is on practice. Whereas many protestants (especially our Reformed Baptist friends, since I see a lot of them here) tend to use Romans as the lens through which they read an dinterpret all of scripture, Anabaptist theology tends to think of the Sermon on the Mount as their key scripture.

Thank you for your response. I am assuming by "not looking much different" you are referring to the theological perspectives and not the "emphasis is on practice", though that would, I take it, to be a logical extension of faith exemplified.

I'm not sure of the differences in nonresistance and pacifism within the context to which you refer and would, yes, appreciate your greater clarification. If I'm reading you right, this is something that is written but not really something accorded much attention anymore; as though it were something gradually on its way out. Is this a correct assessment?

I can certainly understand the accommodation to more traditional members as this would, presumably, be a matter involving, at the least, those traditions and, possibly, customs, as well, and how "the times they are a changing" effect this and cannot but wonder to what extent the ends of this might be and of any attritional danger this presents.

I'm a little unclear as to the, "tend to use Romans as the lens" statement, it would appear there should be (imo) a modifier in there considering the audience of the time, even though the specific audience to the Sermon on the Mount was, for all intents and purposes, the same. Still, while I think I can understand the reasoning for focusing on the Sermon's centrality (if you would, elaborate on this somewhat, please) have to ask is this a central core that is returned to for decisive purposes and, if so, to what extent other areas of Scripture are modified or subjected to this.

Even though there is, as I'm understanding you, an emphasis on practice there would appear still a change in tradition in process (albeit reigned in) in a gradual and decreasing fashion. If this be the case, then what are we seeing down future's road?

 

[Daniel Cocciardi]

I have a question for CrazyLiz. Can you explain the difference between non-resistance and pacifism? I have always had an interest in the Mennonites.

 

[P_G]

You might be surprised at how much the Mennonites adhere to the OT!

There is a great move towards the restoration of Zion.
We do beleive in keeping unto ourselves ie not to be buddy buddy
with the unsaved.

I would call the Mennonites Arminian and very much so.
There is a call to modesty in dress and lifestyle.
Things like drinking or smoking are very looked down upon.

To do battle with out a defenseive reason is unthinkable.
I can use force to protect hearth and home but not agressively.
And better if I would have met the needs of the person who would want
to rob me before he does it so that he wouldn't have the need to do that.

And of course the beleivers baptism.
Some of us still drive buggies but not too many
not in the MCA anyway. But some as well as adhering to
"Plain" clothing
ie no buttons or shiny things.

Some churches hold very tight to all the sort of Mennonitie type things
others are very exhuberant our church is pure charismatic in fact almost to
the point of being pentecostal!

Did you know that the Mennonites are the largest missionary denomination behind the Roman Catholic church? Yupp little known fact but we are.

And most of all we are about Love one another.
So was Jesus.
So go ye then hence forth and do the Mennonite thing
Jump in da boogey vonest and spraed some choy nah


Blessings

Pastor George

 

[Crazy Liz]

Thank you for your response. I am assuming by "not looking much different" you are referring to the theological perspectives and not the "emphasis is on practice", though that would, I take it, to be a logical extension of faith exemplified.

Actually, I was thinking more literally about how Mennonites look, both in their personal appearance and their church services. Most wear regular clothes and have services in English that look very much like the services of other Evangelical churches.

Nehemiah mentioned buggies and plain clothes. That would be a small minority of Mennonites today, yet the idea of "keeping separate from the world" is something some conferences and congregations are still struggling with. This was a big issue a generation or two ago, and continuing to use the German language until WWII helped reinforce that separateness. OTOH, the irony wasn't lost on Mennonites that they were very interested in evangelism in foreign missions, but reluctant to welcome their neighbors if they were "English" (or "American," depending on where you live). As a result, there are far more Mennonites in Africa and in India than there are in the Americas, where most Mennonites in both North and South America continued to be quite a closed ethnic community until rather recently.

I'm not sure of the differences in nonresistance and pacifism within the context to which you refer and would, yes, appreciate your greater clarification. If I'm reading you right, this is something that is written but not really something accorded much attention anymore; as though it were something gradually on its way out. Is this a correct assessment?

I hope it's not on the way out, although it may be. Mennonites and Quakers are known as "historic peace churches." Historical denominational distinctives are on the way out. However, the different "flavors" of Christian spirituality that have developed in different denominations have an important place in the church universal. IMHO, doctrinal and other distinctions that separate Christian brothers and sisters from each other need to be either eliminated or reframed as different perspectives or practices that contribute to the rich diversity of the Kingdom of God, which includes every tribe, tongue and nation. How the historic peace churches are going to preserve their peace traditions as a gift to the Chruch universal while at the same time recognizing as a brother or sister someone with an icon of Saint George,

Joan of Arc,

or some other warrior saint is a challenge.

I'm a little unclear as to the, "tend to use Romans as the lens" statement, it would appear there should be (imo) a modifier in there considering the audience of the time, even though the specific audience to the Sermon on the Mount was, for all intents and purposes, the same. Still, while I think I can understand the reasoning for focusing on the Sermon's centrality (if you would, elaborate on this somewhat, please) have to ask is this a central core that is returned to for decisive purposes and, if so, to what extent other areas of Scripture are modified or subjected to this.

Most protestants tend to focus on Romans, as Luther relied on it (among other books) in support of the idea of justification by faith, and Calvin's TULIP is also largely based on Romans. The focus is more on doctrine than on practice. The Sermon on the Mount focuses more on practice than on doctrine. Mennonites (although perhaps not as much as Quakers) may say they aren't as interested in what you believe than in whether you are obedient to Christ.

I didn't address all your questions, but does this give you a better idea where I think the Mennonites are heading in the future?

 

[Crazy Liz]

I have a question for CrazyLiz. Can you explain the difference between non-resistance and pacifism? I have always had an interest in the Mennonites.

In the most basic terms, pacifists oppose all war (and use of force) and therefore try to get the government not to wage war.

Nonresistance recognizes that God has given the government the power of the sword, but this view argues that Christians are called not to exercise this power. Someone who holds the nonresistance position might not protest against a war, but would not join the army, be a police officer, or be a judge.

A pacifist probably would protest against war and would not join the army, but might be a judge.

 

[Crazy Liz]

You might be surprised at how much the Mennonites adhere to the OT!

There is a great move towards the restoration of Zion.

Could you say more about this? I have not heard of this before. Is this mostly in a particular conference or geographical area?

We do beleive in keeping unto ourselves ie not to be buddy buddy
with the unsaved.

I think you would currently find a trend away from this mindset, but my contacts are mostly with Mennonite and Mennonite Brethren on the West Coast, Kansas and western Canada. I'm guessing without looking at your profile that you are probably in Ohio, Indiana or maybe Pennsylvania. (Did I guess right? ) We might be familiar with entirely different segments of Mennonites.

 

[Pilgrim 33]

Actually, I was thinking more literally about how Mennonites look, both in their personal appearance and their church services. Most wear regular clothes and have services in English that look very much like the services of other Evangelical churches.

From what I've seen, the Mennnonites in the Pennsylvania, Wisconson and Michigan areas are more traditional in appearance.

Nehemiah mentioned buggies and plain clothes. That would be a small minority of Mennonites today, yet the idea of "keeping separate from the world" is something some conferences and congregations are still struggling with.

"In the world but not of it" is what it sounds like.

Mennonites (although perhaps not as much as Quakers) may say they aren't as interested in what you believe than in whether you are obedient to Christ.

Here it sounds like it is a matter of, "do you practice what you preach."

I didn't address all your questions, but does this give you a better idea where I think the Mennonites are heading in the future?

We've covered more ground involving current trends; though where this is all leading into the future still remains. For example, customs and traditions in transition in order to be able to feed one's family forces educational improvements, improved productivity, greater and wider business ventures in dealing with "the English" and, all of which, also presses home the increasaing needs for modern conveniences such sa electricity, telephones, computers, etc. Despite what resistance there may be it appears the Mennonites are being swept along with the rest of our species in order to even minimally keep their heads above economic waters. Surely this has, and will have, an effect not only on their customs and traditions but, also, ultimately, on their overall theology as well.

 

[Crazy Liz]

We've covered more ground involving current trends; though where this is all leading into the future still remains. For example, customs and traditions in transition in order to be able to feed one's family forces educational improvements, improved productivity, greater and wider business ventures in dealing with "the English" and, all of which, also presses home the increasaing needs for modern conveniences such sa electricity, telephones, computers, etc. Despite what resistance there may be it appears the Mennonites are being swept along with the rest of our species in order to even minimally keep their heads above economic waters. Surely this has, and will have, an effect not only on their customs and traditions but, also, ultimately, on their overall theology as well.

No. I think you're still no getting it. The vast majority of Mennonites have never had customs or traditions that opposed either technology or education in any way. The vast majority of Mennonites have never worn distinctive clothing. Some groups of Mennonites were influenced by the Amish in the 1920s and 30s to adopt some Amish customs, in modified form. Most of these groups have gone back to their earlier traditions of dress and decorations. Few, if any, ever adopted the Amish opposition to technology. (This isn't to say you won't find organic farmers among the Mennonites, but probably in no greater proportion to other farmers than you would find elsewhere.) None (that I know of) adopted the Amish objection to higher education. Mennonites, on average, have as high or higher education compared to most other Americans.

Like other Christians, it is hard for Mennonites to keep their heads above economic waters while maintaining ethical business practices. Yes, this does affect the theology of 20th and 21st century American Christians, but no more of Mennonites than of anybody else.

What I'm tryng to say is that you have a wrong idea about what most Mennonites are like. You associate Amish traditions with Mennonites. Some Mennonites adopted some of these practices for a period of about 40-50 years. They are not really part of Mennonite tradition at all.

OTOH, nonresistance is part of Mennonite theology and tradition. I suspect if and when military conscription returns we will see more attention paid to this tradition. Right now, there is no compulsion for non-volunteers to fight so most Mennonites (sadly) are not thinking about it, even though our nation is at war. However, this is understandable, given that Anabaptist theology takes a nonresistance position, and not a pacifist one.

Yes, there have been some changes, partly due to economic pressures and/or prosperity. For example (as a result of Mennonite theology) there were no Mennonite lawyers when I was growing up. Now there are quite a few. There are some changes that will affect the future, but your mistaken ideas about the present and the past make it difficult to discuss them.

 

[chrispe]

Mennonites vary greatly depending on where you go. I am a Mennonite. I live in Philadelphia, I have a car, a cell phone and live like most other people. Some Mennonites don't even drive cars. But what we do share is many beliefs. First of all, we are pacifists. Second, we believe that baptism is a choice, so children are not baptised until they are old enough to decide that they want Jesus as their savior. Other beliefs vary greaty. I hope this is helpful.