Thread: UK Mennonite church closing Board: Oblivion / Ship of Fools.
To visit this thread, use this URL:
http://forum.ship-of-fools.com/cgi-bin/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic;f=70;t=030461
Posted by Sipech (# 16870) on
:
The Guardian have reported on the end of Sunday services for the UK Mennonite church, with their final service to be held this Sunday afternoon.
I, for one, am sorry to see them go. I'm rather partial to anabaptist theology and praxis.
Is this indicative of a general downward trend in anabaptism? I'm almost entirely ignorant of how that expression of faith fares in other countries.
As a wider question for possible discussion is: if you're not part of a particular denomination, how do you feel about seeing another in decline? In particular, I have in mind the United Reformed Church, where in quite a few places they have joined with a dwindling Methodist congregation to bolster numbers.
Or is it no bad thing if someone abandons one flavour of church to take up another?
This particular church isn't unknown on the ship, as they had a Mystery Worshipper visit them 6 years ago. Report here.
Posted by mr cheesy (# 3330) on
:
Well, I think there are a few things worth saying:
First, Mennonites have never had a particularly strong foothold in the UK. In recent years the Mennonite influence in the British scene has been restricted to the Anabaptist Network - which is more of a study group of interested people - the London Mennonite Centre, which was mostly staffed by N American Mennonites and which recently moved operations (IIRC) to the Midlands.
Second, my understanding is that the Wood Green Mennonite church was never very strong. There are (or were) a couple of other Mennonite/Anabaptist churches in England, but I think they might have been focussed on particular immigrant groups.
The ideals of the Mennonites have a slightly wider impact - for example Canon David Porter, the ABofC's adviser on reconciliation states he is not Anglican and is a "high Church Mennonite".
But I think in general the whole Mennonite schtick hasn't really gone very far in contemporary Britain, more's the pity.
[ 17. March 2016, 09:12: Message edited by: mr cheesy ]
Posted by mr cheesy (# 3330) on
:
Incidentally, I was just reading this interesting thesis about the changing situation for Mennonites in part of Canada.
I'm wondering if one thing we're missing in England is this notion of "cultural" Mennonitism - so it has been trying to adapt the ideas to quite a different majority religious culture.
Posted by Bibaculus (# 18528) on
:
That is sad. But as Mr Cheesy says, the Mennonite tradition is pretty alien to the UK.
An excellent books about the Amish (who have grown in number over the last 100 years) is Donald B Kraybill, Karen M Johnson-Weiner, Steven M Nolt The Amish (Johns Hopkins UP, 2013). It is very readable, and gives some background on wider Mennonite history (which was all new to me).
Posted by cliffdweller (# 13338) on
:
Mennonites are still quite strong here in the US, in particular parts of California. My son went to a local Mennonite school focused on restorative justice, which was an amazing experience-- brought him from an average, somewhat disengaged student to an active, passionate involved learner.
Posted by sabine (# 3861) on
:
Sorry to hear about the closing. For the last few years I have been attending a Mennonite Church as well as my Quaker Meeting.
After enduring oppression and torture in Europe (see The Martyr's Mirror for gory details) Many Mennonites came to North America (via The Netherlands and other countries), and some went on to South America. Like many immigrants, they continued with their cultural distinctives (language, food, clothing) as well as their spiritual distinctives.
However, over time, many Mennonites left aside some of the more stereotypical practices (like head coverings for women). And a long time ago, the Amish felt the Mennonites were getting too worldly and broke away.
Anabaptist theology has gained popularity in the last few years. Here is an excerpt from the book, The Naked Anabaptist by Stuart Murray. http://www.anabaptistnetwork.com/node/539 I've heard that anabaptism is drawing attention from people who are not interested in joining Mennonite churches but like aspects of the theology and practice.
My experience with Mennonites is that they are committed to peace and service and consider The Sermon on the Mount as their unofficial creed (this has been told to me numerous times). They seem to have a grasp of radical discipleship, and their centuries-old tradition of singing acapella in 4-part harmony is wonderful.
I wouldn't be surprised to find that the anabaptist movement in Europe continues even if Mennonite Churches do not remain open.
ETA: Oh, and Mennonites pretty much invented conscientious objection to military service in the US--invented it with their lives, some of them.
sabine
[ 17. March 2016, 15:16: Message edited by: sabine ]
Posted by Amanda B. Reckondwythe (# 5521) on
:
The Church of God in Christ, Mennonite, also known as Holdeman Mennonites, are of the strict observance: plain dress, no frivolous pastimes, no voting, no military service or working in law enforcement, etc.
I MWd our local Holdeman Mennonite church a while back -- very interesting, especially the singing.
Posted by Enoch (# 14322) on
:
Historically, I don't think there have ever really been either Mennonites or Anabaptists in the UK, just as there have never really been Lutherans here. Some of the ideas that they stood for on the Continent were part of the mix that fertilised Browneism, Separatism and Independency, which is the ancestry of Baptists, the URC and those Congregationalists that did not join the URC. The Lollard tradition though is also part of that mix. So there isn't really any reason for there to have been Mennonites. We have our own traditions here. As with being a Lutheran, if one were not ethnically Mennonite, what specific reason would there be to be one.
Posted by Gamaliel (# 812) on
:
Where's Steve Langton? He'd be interested in this ...
I think what Shipmates have said about the way that Mennonites never really gained traction in the UK is right ... in some ways the Quakers - historically at least - fulfilled a similar role here to that played by the Mennonites in continental Europe.
I think their principles have a wider appeal than their practices - but it's not as if they are the only ones espousing the kind of causes and values one might associate with them.
When there was an indigeneous Dissenting tradition then it was always going to be difficult for a continental import to gain traction.
Posted by RuthW (# 13) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Enoch:
Historically, I don't think there have ever really been either Mennonites or Anabaptists in the UK, just as there have never really been Lutherans here. Some of the ideas that they stood for on the Continent were part of the mix that fertilised Browneism, Separatism and Independency, which is the ancestry of Baptists, the URC and those Congregationalists that did not join the URC. The Lollard tradition though is also part of that mix. So there isn't really any reason for there to have been Mennonites. We have our own traditions here. As with being a Lutheran, if one were not ethnically Mennonite, what specific reason would there be to be one.
To elaborate on this, from a North American Mennonite perspective ...
In the US until fairly recently, being Mennonite was as much a cultural identity as a religious one. My parents were both originally Mennonite, and when I meet someone with a Mennonite surname, we play the Mennonite game -- we describe our family lineages until we figure out how we're related. Not if we're related -- how. If I meet someone with a Mennonite last name here in California or in Kansas or Oklahoma, chances are very high that one way or another we're related, if only distantly and/or by marriage. Mennonites were a small group who kept themselves separate from others; my parents' generation was the first in my family in which some people married non-Mennonites. My 1930s-born parents' first language was German, though 3/4 of my forebears arrived in the US in 1870s and the families hadn't lived in a German-speaking country since the 18th century. The Mennonite churches in the US changed considerably in the latter half of the 20th century, and there are now lots of Latino Mennonites (and plenty of people from other backgrounds as well), but it wasn't all that long ago that they were small, closed circles of families and friends.
Posted by no prophet's flag is set so... (# 15560) on
:
There are several different stripes of Mennonite in Canada. The Ontario ones tend to be more conservative than Manitoba, Saskatchewan and Alberta. Mennonite Brethren churches are the majority churches north of Saskatoon and south of Winnipeg. Low German (plott Dietsch) and relatively incomprehensible to the German Roman Catholics.
Many Mennonites here have Mexican, Peruvian and Chilean connections with family ties there. A lot of travel of Canadians down. We note a lot of living the social gospel and rejection of the whole prosperity gospel ideas. They certainly have my respect. The MCC (Mennonite Central Committee) organises lots of local and international relief that everyone contributes to. They are turning into community churches without much ethnic reference. We will see the closure of most Anglican churches (about half of the few gone already) while Mennonites keep building larger ones.
[ 18. March 2016, 02:20: Message edited by: no prophet's flag is set so... ]
Posted by LeRoc (# 3216) on
:
quote:
no prophet's flag is set so...: Low German (plott Dietsch) and relatively incomprehensible to the German Roman Catholics.
I'd be able to understand them well. Lower Saxon (spoken in the North of Germany and the North East of the Netherlands) is the language I grew up in.
Posted by *Leon* (# 3377) on
:
I knew some people from that church about a decade ago, and I'm sad to hear it's closing. They were a very inspiring bunch.
Having said that, the people I knew were from North America, with moderately weak ties to the UK. It's not surprising to me that the church would struggle. I've also known Mennonites getting involved in a URC church with no great problems (and being a positive influence on the URC church). So any Mennonites coming here will still have a church where they can fit in. And I expect them to continue to be a positive influence on the URC.
Posted by moonlitdoor (# 11707) on
:
quote:
posted by Gamaliel
I think their principles have a wider appeal than their practices
What are the main principles of Mennonites or Anabaptists more generally that have a wide appeal ? I looked at the link provided by Amanda B Reckondwythe, and some of their principles would not seem to have a wide appeal, eg compulsory beards, plain clothes, no radios, television etc, lack of enthusiasm for higher education.
I assume those rules would be relaxed in the less conservative branches, but I didn't see anything else which stood out as an obvious candidate to be what Gamaliel was referring to.
Posted by Sipech (# 16870) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by sabine:
After enduring oppression and torture in Europe (see The Martyr's Mirror for gory details) Many Mennonites came to North America (via The Netherlands and other countries), and some went on to South America.
<snip>
Anabaptist theology has gained popularity in the last few years. Here is an excerpt from the book, The Naked Anabaptist by Stuart Murray. http://www.anabaptistnetwork.com/node/539 I've heard that anabaptism is drawing attention from people who are not interested in joining Mennonite churches but like aspects of the theology and practice.
Thanks for those recommendations. I have a copy of George Hunston Williams' The Radical Reformation which I dip into occasionally, but haven't yet read cover-to-cover. Will look those up too.
Posted by Bibaculus (# 18528) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by moonlitdoor:
quote:
posted by Gamaliel
I think their principles have a wider appeal than their practices
What are the main principles of Mennonites or Anabaptists more generally that have a wide appeal ? I looked at the link provided by Amanda B Reckondwythe, and some of their principles would not seem to have a wide appeal, eg compulsory beards, plain clothes, no radios, television etc, lack of enthusiasm for higher education.
I assume those rules would be relaxed in the less conservative branches, but I didn't see anything else which stood out as an obvious candidate to be what Gamaliel was referring to.
I think probably the pacifism, and maybe separation from the world, would be appealing (that is why they may be a bit like Quakers). Obviously there are degrees of separation from the world..
Posted by Nick Tamen (# 15164) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by moonlitdoor:
What are the main principles of Mennonites or Anabaptists more generally that have a wide appeal ? I looked at the link provided by Amanda B Reckondwythe, and some of their principles would not seem to have a wide appeal, eg compulsory beards, plain clothes, no radios, television etc, lack of enthusiasm for higher education.
I assume those rules would be relaxed in the less conservative branches . . . .
I think it's really the other way around—the specific things you listed are marks of very conservative, strict observance Mennonite groups. They are not mainstream Mennonite distinctives.
From my perspective, the main distinctive principles would include pacifism and non-violence, simple living, and justice and reconciliation.
Posted by mr cheesy (# 3330) on
:
Oh I think anabaptists/mennonites have a lot distinctive that they can offer to enrich British Christian life. For one thing, they offer a well-established way to be a Protestant without being Evangelical, Reformed or Episcopal.
Which is not to say that there is no mixing of the theology with those other strands, but is to say that we're missing something when that's not part of British Christian culture. This sense of being similar to other Christian communities and yet quite clearly different enabled and encouraged new ways to perceive many different issues, in places where there were historic Anabaptist/Menonite groups, I believe.
I also think that Mennonites offer a way to have an integrated Protestant Christian life - in a time when some Evangelicals tried to suggest that the "social gospel" was a distraction from the real gospel, the Mennonites managed to show that social action was in a deep sense an outpouring of the gospel. I also think they have something to teach about community, about commitment to each other, and so on.
Of course there are also many drawbacks, too. For me, they're clearly not the answer to all problems. But I think it is clearly our loss not to have Mennonites as part of our religious mix in the UK.
Posted by mr cheesy (# 3330) on
:
I also agree that it is a similar - but not the same - role as the one Quakers have in contemporary British Protestant culture.
I think the differences are quite important - for example the British Quakers have generally followed the Unitarians into a faith that is not exclusively Christian nor even deist. And the Mennonites are not a silent worship tradition.
Posted by Gamaliel (# 812) on
:
Yes, I'd agree with what others have said in reply to moonlitdoor - and I wasn't thinking of the highly conservative elements such as compulsory beards or buggies and so on - those are things associated with more conservative Mennonite communities ...
Rather, I was thinking of the more 'integrated' and holistic approach that mr cheesy mentions - and the strong communal emphasis.
One of the downsides of 'standard' evangelicalism, as it were, is that it can become a kind of cognitive, propositional-based faith - 'We believe in x,y,z ... we don't believe in p,q,r ...' that doesn't necessarily translate into a particularly holistic or distinctive life-style ... it's more about what you 'don't do' than do, for instance - or about a penchant for particular worship styles ...
And yes, I'm aware that the same can be said for other Christian traditions.
What you get with the Anabaptist and Mennonite tradition - and I agree with mr cheesy that it doesn't address all bases or supply all the answers - is an attempt at least to form a Gospel-oriented lifestyle - through pacifism, simplicity of dress and manners and so on ...
In some ways they are almost a form of Protestant monasticism - not in terms of the celibacy and so on but in terms of an 'intentionality' about expressing faith through life-style choices and so on.
Posted by moonlitdoor (# 11707) on
:
Simple living I can understand, as that is certainly different from the consumerism which is a big feature of our societies.
Pacifism though, I'm not sure what difference it makes to me whether I am a pacifist or not. I've not been asked to fight anyone so far and likely never will be. I guess it means if I were in America, I wouldn't own a gun but I assume that would be common enough in various denominations.
What do justice and reconciliation mean in this context ? At face value I can't think of anything less distinctive than believing in justice, it's right alongside motherhood and apple pie.
Posted by LeRoc (# 3216) on
:
quote:
moonlitdoor: I'm not sure what difference it makes to me whether I am a pacifist or not.
I'm sure it would influence your political opinion on several wars that are being fought right now?
Posted by mr cheesy (# 3330) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by moonlitdoor:
Pacifism though, I'm not sure what difference it makes to me whether I am a pacifist or not. I've not been asked to fight anyone so far and likely never will be. I guess it means if I were in America, I wouldn't own a gun but I assume that would be common enough in various denominations.
Well, it might include a refusal to participate in state ceremonies honouring the military, it might affect the way one spends money, the kinds of issues one campaigns on, the kinds of things one reflects upon, the types of spiritual language one uses and more.
I'm sure others have mentioned it before, but the Christian Peacemaker Teams are a particularly robust expression of Mennonite (and other Peace Church) responses to violence.
quote:
What do justice and reconciliation mean in this context ? At face value I can't think of anything less distinctive than believing in justice, it's right alongside motherhood and apple pie.
Well sure, it does sound obvious - but in being outsiders the Mennonites have developed skills in listening and trying to understand alternative points of view. Which, sad to say, is a commodity rarely found in the church never mind the world.
Posted by Sipech (# 16870) on
:
It's interesting that the Quakers are noted as "filling the role" in the UK that Mennonites have elsewhere. It got me thinking about the tenrecs of Madagascar and how they, evolving independently, fill the roles (and even resemble) filled by other mammals elsewhere in Europe.
Might something be similar be going on with different church expressions?
If so, I wonder if the "faithful remnant" narrative of some American evangelical churches is a cousin of the more conservative catholic view which regards non-catholics as anathema.
Posted by Nick Tamen (# 15164) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by mr cheesy:
Oh I think anabaptists/mennonites have a lot distinctive that they can offer to enrich British Christian life. For one thing, they offer a well-established way to be a Protestant without being Evangelical, Reformed or Episcopal.
. . .
I also think that Mennonites offer a way to have an integrated Protestant Christian life - in a time when some Evangelicals tried to suggest that the "social gospel" was a distraction from the real gospel, the Mennonites managed to show that social action was in a deep sense an outpouring of the gospel.
For what it's worth, the website of the Mennonite Church USA, the largest Mennonite denomination in the US, specifically says that Anabaptists "are neither Catholic nor Protestant, but we share ties with those streams of Christianity." I don't know whether other Anabaptist groups similarly eschew the label "Protestant."
Posted by mr cheesy (# 3330) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Sipech:
Might something be similar be going on with different church expressions?
Oh yes, I'm sure that is true.
In the UK I think we see regional variations in the expressions of Christianity.
So, for example in Scotland and Ireland, the dominant model was Presbyterian and over a few hundred years there were several different evolved forms from that basis.
Elsewhere the dominant expression was Methodist or Baptist/Evangelical.
Of course, in recent times these have become much more mixed up - so it can be hard to find much variation across a large number of historic denominations occupying "middle of the road" Protestantism in much of the UK.
That's a total overgeneralisation, but I think it is certainly true that forms of Presbyterian church in Scotland occupy space that might have elsewhere been occupied by Baptists or Methodists.
quote:
If so, I wonder if the "faithful remnant" narrative of some American evangelical churches is a cousin of the more conservative catholic view which regards non-catholics as anathema.
I'm not entirely sure what you mean here, but the difference between the ancestors of the mainline Protestant denominations in the UK and the ancestors of the Mennonites in North America is that the latter really were a "remnant" in the sense of being hated and persecuted by everyone. Indeed, I understand that many of the Canadian Mennonites were "encouraged" to leave Russia in the 21 century - so not even very long ago.
Posted by mr cheesy (# 3330) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Nick Tamen:
For what it's worth, the website of the Mennonite Church USA, the largest Mennonite denomination in the US, specifically says that Anabaptists "are neither Catholic nor Protestant, but we share ties with those streams of Christianity." I don't know whether other Anabaptist groups similarly eschew the label "Protestant."
Yes, there are some who decry the term Protestant. I think it is fairly clear that the Mennonites were a form of Protestantism which developed from the Reformation, albeit one which held itself quite aloof from the rest. But of course scholars can argue about whether or not they are really very similar to Protestants.
My observation is that they have much in common, but a surprising amount in variance, to many Protestant groups.
Posted by Nick Tamen (# 15164) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by moonlitdoor:
Pacifism though, I'm not sure what difference it makes to me whether I am a pacifist or not. I've not been asked to fight anyone so far and likely never will be. I guess it means if I were in America, I wouldn't own a gun but I assume that would be common enough in various denominations.
Peacemaking is much broader than not going to war, though it can well include protesting non-peaceful government actions and providing an alternative witness. It's also not just about not using guns; it goes to how every kind of conflict is handled, including personal disputes.
quote:
What do justice and reconciliation mean in this context ? At face value I can't think of anything less distinctive than believing in justice, it's right alongside motherhood and apple pie.
Racial reconciliation, living wages, fair trade, fighting poverty, sustainable food practices, environmental stewardship. . . .
Posted by cliffdweller (# 13338) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by moonlitdoor:
Simple living I can understand, as that is certainly different from the consumerism which is a big feature of our societies.
Pacifism though, I'm not sure what difference it makes to me whether I am a pacifist or not. I've not been asked to fight anyone so far and likely never will be. I guess it means if I were in America, I wouldn't own a gun but I assume that would be common enough in various denominations.
What do justice and reconciliation mean in this context ? At face value I can't think of anything less distinctive than believing in justice, it's right alongside motherhood and apple pie.
There are quite a lot of implications, both in one's personal private life and in the broader sphere of politics and economics, in adopting a consistent, lived-out ethic of non-violence, peace, and reconciliation. As mentioned upthread, my son went to a Mennonite middle/high school that focused on "restorative justice." It really shaped every aspect of what they were studying as well as how the school itself was run. Things like student discipline problems were handled in a very distinctive way quite different from what we'd see at other schools, even Christian schools. It's a way of life-- one we found quite appealing and really had a huge impact on our son's life and character.
Posted by sabine (# 3861) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by mr cheesy:
quote:
Originally posted by Nick Tamen:
For what it's worth, the website of the Mennonite Church USA, the largest Mennonite denomination in the US, specifically says that Anabaptists "are neither Catholic nor Protestant, but we share ties with those streams of Christianity." I don't know whether other Anabaptist groups similarly eschew the label "Protestant."
Yes, there are some who decry the term Protestant. I think it is fairly clear that the Mennonites were a form of Protestantism which developed from the Reformation, albeit one which held itself quite aloof from the rest. But of course scholars can argue about whether or not they are really very similar to Protestants.
My observation is that they have much in common, but a surprising amount in variance, to many Protestant groups.
I've been attending a Mennonite Church for 10 years and have an associate membership. I've also done about 20 years of ethnographic research (fieldwork, etc.) among various Menno and Amish groups.
None of them claim the title Protestant. Rather, they feel that they are "The Third Way," a dissent that did not come directly from Martin Luther, but through breaking off on their own from the Roman Catholic Church by baptising adults. The word anabaptism means "twice baptized." And for this they were tortured and otherwise abused. Being neither Protestant nor Catholic doesn't mean that there aren't elements of both in Mennonite theology and practice.
See here for the Mennonite's own position on this
sabine
Posted by Nick Tamen (# 15164) on
:
Interesting, sabine. Thanks.
Posted by Sipech (# 16870) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by sabine:
The word anabaptism means "twice baptized."
Bit nitpicking, but doesn't the prefix ana- mean "against"? I thought it was an epithet initially applied against the group signifying that infant baptism was the norm and that the anabaptists were against baptism.
Similar with anastasis, the Greek term for resurrection, I understood that as meaning against-death.
Do I need to brush up on my Greek etymology?
Posted by sabine (# 3861) on
:
Thanks. Here is another link to the question about the beginnings of the Mennonite Church
sabine
Posted by mr cheesy (# 3330) on
:
Probably worth saying that there are lots of different kinds of Mennonites. To my mind, the distinction some are trying to put between themselves and Protestants is quite fake - particularly for the Mennonite Evangelicals (hard to see how one could derive the idea of being an Evangelical outwith of the concept of being a Protestant). Fairly recently a new group was formed, apparently to resist change in the Mennonite church and apparently to contract the ideas of Mennonite and Evangelical.
[ 18. March 2016, 14:10: Message edited by: mr cheesy ]
Posted by sabine (# 3861) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Sipech:
quote:
Originally posted by sabine:
The word anabaptism means "twice baptized."
Bit nitpicking, but doesn't the prefix ana- mean "against"? I thought it was an epithet initially applied against the group signifying that infant baptism was the norm and that the anabaptists were against baptism.
Similar with anastasis, the Greek term for resurrection, I understood that as meaning against-death.
Do I need to brush up on my Greek etymology?
Everyone is entitled to nitpick once in awhile. ![[Biased]](wink.gif)
However, this is how the Mennonites have been using the word since the 1500s. The initial group of leaders (some of them RC priests) had already been baptized, and then after baptizing themselves again, they baptized others who had already been baptized.
I don't think they are concerned at this point about the original Greek meaning, but you bring up an interesting side note.
sabine
Posted by mr cheesy (# 3330) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Sipech:
Bit nitpicking, but doesn't the prefix ana- mean "against"? I thought it was an epithet initially applied against the group signifying that infant baptism was the norm and that the anabaptists were against baptism.
I don't think so. I think the "ana" meant "again" - so they were re-baptisers, resisting the idea from much of the rest of Christianity that there was only "one baptism for the forgiveness of sins".
I don't think they were ever "against" baptism - unlike the Quakers - but just did not recognise infant baptism as "real" baptism, hence resisted the idea that they could not follow their conscience and baptise adults even if they'd been dunked before.
[ 18. March 2016, 14:15: Message edited by: mr cheesy ]
Posted by Nick Tamen (# 15164) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by mr cheesy:
quote:
Originally posted by Sipech:
Bit nitpicking, but doesn't the prefix ana- mean "against"? I thought it was an epithet initially applied against the group signifying that infant baptism was the norm and that the anabaptists were against baptism.
I don't think so. I think the "ana" meant "again" - so they were re-baptisers, resisting the idea from much of the rest of Christianity that there was only "one baptism for the forgiveness of sins".
Right. "Ana-" means "again" or "re-," so that an ana-baptist is one who re-baptizes or baptizes again.
Likewise, anastasis means "stand again."
Posted by Amanda B. Reckondwythe (# 5521) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Nick Tamen:
The website of the Mennonite Church USA
There's a MW report of a Mennonite Church USA congregation here.
Posted by sabine (# 3861) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by mr cheesy:
Probably worth saying that there are lots of different kinds of Mennonites. To my mind, the distinction some are trying to put between themselves and Protestants is quite fake - particularly for the Mennonite Evangelicals (hard to see how one could derive the idea of being an Evangelical outwith of the concept of being a Protestant). Fairly recently a new group was formed, apparently to resist change in the Mennonite church and apparently to contract the ideas of Mennonite and Evangelical.
You are quite right about the many different groups of Mennonites, but I take exception to your characterization that their take on The Third Way (which has been in place since the 1500s) is fake. It is a founding concept.
As the popularity of Anabaptist theology has started go go mainstream, many Mennonite groups are changing. I suspect that those who do may well lose sight of the original concept.
Or other issues may be seen as more important by some. . .Evana (not considered a denomination) is being formed for reasons that have plagued followers of both the catholic and protestant worlds--differences over membership for LGBTQ people, and pastors who are LGBTQ.
From The Mennonite
sabine
Posted by sabine (# 3861) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by mr cheesy:
I don't think they were ever "against" baptism - unlike the Quakers
Just a mention, and I hope I don't derail: We aren't against baptism; we just don't think the ritual of water baptism is necessary. We do have a concept of interior baptism.
sabine
Posted by mr cheesy (# 3330) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by sabine:
You are quite right about the many different groups of Mennonites, but I take exception to your characterization that their take on The Third Way (which has been in place since the 1500s) is fake. It is a founding concept.
It is certainly a concept that has been around for a long time, I just don't believe it was ever true; Anabaptists were an integral part of the Protestant Reformation, and hence can accurately be described as Protestants - whatever their internal monologue says. I appreciate that there are different views on this point, but I believe that there are many who study the history of religion who would classify the Mennonites as a form of Protestant.
The Third Way concept is also pretty flawed given it did not appear to take any account of other groups which were not the Roman Catholics nor the Lutherans/Episcopalians. Given Orthodoxy had been around for a very long time, it clearly wasn't a "Third" way.
But again, I think these historical distinctions are important to understand: the Anabaptists saw themselves as a distinct group which developed in Europe, which influenced other groups (such as the English Baptists) and which was persecuted by everyone.
As I've indicated above, I believe in the evolution of ideas. Given that Mennonites have intermingled with Evangelicals and other Protestants for a very long time now, there is even less distinctive about them.
quote:
As the popularity of Anabaptist theology has started go go mainstream, many Mennonite groups are changing. I suspect that those who do may well lose sight of the original concept.
Well that's clearly true. There are lots of different Mennonite groups, with various views of themselves and the relation to Protestant groups and wider Christianity. One Anabaptist group I know, for example, is apparently perusing a path which will lead to a closer relationship with the Roman Catholics. I'm sure that there are some which look aghast at this development, but who is to say whether the one is "losing sight of the original concept" or not?
quote:
Or other issues may be seen as more important by some. . .Evana (not considered a denomination) is being formed for reasons that have plagued followers of both the catholic and protestant worlds--differences over membership for LGBTQ people, and pastors who are LGBTQ.
Yes, but by the nature of it not being called a 'denomination' - which I'm not sure is really a very viable position for them to be taking given the apparent relationship they have with member churches - it is showing that there exists a significant constituency within the Mennonite worldview who want to associate themselves with Protestant and Evangelical ideas.
On your Quaker point, I have read Fox, Penn, Pennington and others and have noted their views on the "interior" baptism.
The point I was making was that the Quakers didn't just think that water baptism was inferior, they rejected it as being a false doctrine and instead pointed to their own doctrine of interior baptism as the real one.
So they just didn't accept that that-thing-others-do-with-water was even a thing at all.
That was never the case with the Mennonites, as far as I understand it.
Posted by sabine (# 3861) on
:
I'm not going to get too deeply in a back and forth here. I am a caregiver for an elderly relative, and my time is limited.
My previous post here come from an insider's POV (my life as a Quaker, my 10 years as an active associate member of a Mennonite Church, a person active at the conference level of Mennonite Church USA, and my 20 years of fieldwork with Mennonites and Amish). I seem to recall that there are not many Mennonites on he Ship, but I am hoping that another will come forth to engage in this conversation.
sabine
Posted by sabine (# 3861) on
:
Ooh, my last post sounded flouncy, and I didn't mean it that way. Sorry. I had been posting for information only. But this is the Ship , and it's way to easy for me to get involved in long discussions.
I really so have to do some caregiving now.
sabine
Posted by mr cheesy (# 3330) on
:
One thing I don't know is the kind of N American Mennonite denomination the London Mennonite congregation most resembled. Anyone know anything about that?
[ 18. March 2016, 16:31: Message edited by: mr cheesy ]
Posted by RuthW (# 13) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by mr cheesy:
One thing I don't know is the kind of N American Mennonite denomination the London Mennonite congregation most resembled. Anyone know anything about that?
The progressive wing of the Mennonite Church USA, I would say.
Edit: For instance, the Mountain States conference, which has ordained a lesbian pastor who works in Denver, as opposed to the Lancaster conference, which has withdrawn from the church.
[ 18. March 2016, 17:31: Message edited by: RuthW ]
Posted by moonlitdoor (# 11707) on
:
The school mentioned by Cliffdweller sounds intriguing. Is there anything you can say by way of example to illustrate what it was like, without going into anything private ?
I don't remember justice, restorative or otherwise, featuring heavily in my schooldays. But I don't mean by that that injustice featured either. It was just mostly about maths, and history, and physics etc. There weren't enough conflicts for the way they were resolved to be the defining characteristic of the school. Maybe that was atypical, but either way I am interested to know more about how the Mennonite school operated.
Posted by Enoch (# 14322) on
:
There are aspects of Mennonite practice as described on this thread, that sound a bit like the Plympers (Brethren), including both the strong sense of community and a tendency to divide into different ecclesial households over issues that are a bit arcane to other people.
As for the claim not to be Protestant, there's plenty of evidence from the Ship that there are some CofE and Episcopalian shipmates who claim not to be Protestant either and with about as much validity.
Does anyone happen to know whether the Bruderhof derives from Mennonite roots?
Posted by Nick Tamen (# 15164) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Enoch:
As for the claim not to be Protestant, there's plenty of evidence from the Ship that there are some CofE and Episcopalian shipmates who claim not to be Protestant either and with about as much validity.
I've known of Lutherans who claim not to be Protestant. I have a hard time getting my head around that one.
Posted by mr cheesy (# 3330) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Enoch:
Does anyone happen to know whether the Bruderhof derives from Mennonite roots?
No, the Bruderhof were set up in the early 20 century in a model based on the Hutterite, but there is no direct ancestral link
Posted by cliffdweller (# 13338) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by moonlitdoor:
The school mentioned by Cliffdweller sounds intriguing. Is there anything you can say by way of example to illustrate what it was like, without going into anything private ?
I don't remember justice, restorative or otherwise, featuring heavily in my schooldays. But I don't mean by that that injustice featured either. It was just mostly about maths, and history, and physics etc. There weren't enough conflicts for the way they were resolved to be the defining characteristic of the school. Maybe that was atypical, but either way I am interested to know more about how the Mennonite school operated.
Yes, the education my youngest son rec'd there was quite different than what my oldest child rec'd in public school or middle child in a more typical American evangelical school. It was really transformative.
Much of the emphasis was in social science classes, of course-- studying economics, history, government, politics, and current events with an eye toward justice issues. But it went beyond that to things like participating in organized protests and other kinds of activism. They twice went thru the process of petitioning the city government for changes in policy/ positions, both successfully. My son was honored by one local government agency with a small scholarship for an essay he wrote as a school project.
In addition, they participated in weekly "justice labs"-- field trips that would run the gamut from simply awareness-raising to volunteering to interactive experiences to more engaged activism. Anything from simply using public transportation (which would sound weirdly ordinary to someone not from in L.A., but here it really is a justice issue-- since some forms of public transit here are almost exclusively used by the poor-- and also relegated to 2nd class status) to going to a still-standing WW2 internment camp for a weekend reenactment of what that experience was like.
[ 18. March 2016, 20:38: Message edited by: cliffdweller ]
Posted by cliffdweller (# 13338) on
:
Meant to add: most decisions effecting the school: budget, disciplinary actions, etc. were made in a highly collaborative way in which the students were full participants, as much or in some cases more than the parents. Lots of focus on creative peacemaking/ restoration in those decision-making processes.
Posted by moonlitdoor (# 11707) on
:
That is very interesting. In what I read before I had obtained the impression of Mennonites as slightly separating themselves from the world, and being principally concerned with how they should live themselves as individuals and a community, rather than telling society how it ought to live.
But that school suggests I got that wrong as it sounds at least as interested in the latter as the former.
Would a student need to share any particular set of principles to flourish there or could a contrary student fare well, who thought something unjust that others felt just ? Justice being one of those things that everyone believes in but not everyone defines in the same way.
ps I have myself taken the bus in Los Angeles, which I did not give a second thought to in advance, and did feel a bit out of place as a tourist, in a way which I have not done anywhere else.
Posted by cliffdweller (# 13338) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by moonlitdoor:
Would a student need to share any particular set of principles to flourish there or could a contrary student fare well, who thought something unjust that others felt just ? Justice being one of those things that everyone believes in but not everyone defines in the same way.
Yes and no. They did encourage lots of healthy debate and were very good at showing both sides of issues. So definitely being on a different side of a political or social issue would be accepted-- encouraged, even. But you would need to buy into the overall principles of the school, which were not really so much religious as philosophical-- things like corroborative decision making, a commitment to peacemaking & non-violence, community building, power-sharing, etc. Those things were so interwoven into the make up of the school you would be pretty miserable if you didn't share those convictions.
Posted by cliffdweller (# 13338) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by moonlitdoor:
ps I have myself taken the bus in Los Angeles, which I did not give a second thought to in advance, and did feel a bit out of place as a tourist, in a way which I have not done anywhere else.
Yeah, it's a weird Los Angeles thing. The buses in particular are almost exclusively used by the poor-- which leads to lots of invisible justice issues in terms of funding for public transit vs. freeways or even the metro (much more middle class usage). So it can be useful to take suburban kids and have them figure out/experience things like: if you were a single mom, what would it be like to juggle a toddler, a baby, and 2 bags of groceries on the bus? If you were living in East LA and working at a swanky downtown hotel, how many buses would you have to take to work and how long would it take you? How reliable are the bus timetables, and how does that impact an hourly worker who is depending on getting to work on time?
Posted by Gamaliel (# 812) on
:
Interesting thread - in many ways it doesn't surprise me in the least that certain Mennonite or other Anabaptist groups may found common cause to some extent with echoes and parallels within the RCC - the 'base-communities' thing ... some aspects of monasticism - the emphasis on having a holistic and integrated approach where there is no separation between life and spirituality as it were ...
Which is also a Quaker emphasis too, of course.
I've heard an RC Benedictine monk speak warmly of certain Protestant 'neo-monastic' communities and also Quakers speak warmly of how much common ground they find with RC 'contemplatives' ...
I think that mr cheesy is right on the historical developments and so on, but I also think that in our more post-modern milieu it's more likely that parallels and overlaps in terms of ethos will be picked up and acted upon - even if structural and institutional barriers show no sign of dissolving anytime soon.
Whatever tradition we are from or espouse, we are all a patchwork or mosaic of different influences and emphases and - rather like a kaleidoscope - as things twist and turn, various patterns and overlaps emerge.
I was once intrigued by a comment by a Methodist minister who observed that even if the Methodist Church as an organisation ceased to exist in the UK - by around the middle of the century according to some forecasts - some form of Wesleyan spirituality would continue to exist.
I'm not entirely sure what he meant by that and how we could measure or evaluate it - but it does strike me that all the various elements in the mix and melange do leave a legacy, an after-taste if you like - or continue in some way that transcends or outlives the organisational structures ... as it were ...
There's something organic about the whole thing - which is only to be expected if we take the 'body' analogies seriously.
Posted by Enoch (# 14322) on
:
Tangent alert
quote:
Originally posted by cliffdweller:
... my son went to a Mennonite middle/high school that focused on "restorative justice." It really shaped every aspect of what they were studying as well as how the school itself was run. Things like student discipline problems were handled in a very distinctive way quite different from what we'd see at other schools, even Christian schools. It's a way of life-- one we found quite appealing and really had a huge impact on our son's life and character.
I recognise that this is a tangent, but I'd picked up the impression on the Ship that the separation of Church and State in the US Constitution is interpreted to mean that schools in the USA have to be ostentatiously secular, that there's nothing corresponding to what we call a V A School. Is there some sort of compromise area on this after all?
Posted by mr cheesy (# 3330) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Gamaliel:
I think that mr cheesy is right on the historical developments and so on, but I also think that in our more post-modern milieu it's more likely that parallels and overlaps in terms of ethos will be picked up and acted upon - even if structural and institutional barriers show no sign of dissolving anytime soon.
Whatever tradition we are from or espouse, we are all a patchwork or mosaic of different influences and emphases and - rather like a kaleidoscope - as things twist and turn, various patterns and overlaps emerge.
I was once intrigued by a comment by a Methodist minister who observed that even if the Methodist Church as an organisation ceased to exist in the UK - by around the middle of the century according to some forecasts - some form of Wesleyan spirituality would continue to exist.
I'm not entirely sure what he meant by that and how we could measure or evaluate it - but it does strike me that all the various elements in the mix and melange do leave a legacy, an after-taste if you like - or continue in some way that transcends or outlives the organisational structures ... as it were ...
My reading of current British Christian spirituality is that there are a few, broad, categories of church (excluding for this discussion the complexities of the Orthodox and RCC which I don't know about). The majority of these broad categories encompass churches from across denominational boundaries and exert parachurch influences on thought and practice. Those churches inside generally become more and more like each other and less and less like other churches in their own denomination.
In my view, it is difficult for a congregation to exist outwith of one of these camps - and will probably become progressively more difficult to sustain.
It seems to me that the Mennonites of London were one of these outliers - different enough to be a culture-shift for joiners; similar enough to make it hard to understand what the point of them is/was and why one might join. AFAIU they (and the Anabaptist Network generally) attracted people who felt disillusioned with the standard church offerings and fairly often seemed to use Anabaptism as a step into something further "out there". That's not necessarily a bad thing, but a church consisting of people who feel that they don't fit anywhere isn't likely to be one that is very stable in the long term.
In terms of British church history, my view is that it is really really hard to keep a minority movement going. When it starts to go, it usually snowballs and then is fairly quickly lost altogether with few or any signs of much influence on the wider church. One of my favourite old denominations is the Glasites, which had a reasonable amount of traction for a while, then collapsed and become completely lost.
I therefore think it is highly unlikely that much of the Methodists will remain in any kind of form that would be recognisable.
And, again, I think we are talking about the peculiar situation in the UK - elsewhere in the world various forms of Wesleyan Holiness churches (sometimes mixed with forms of Episcopalian) have been retained and are strong.
So for me, I think the British Mennonites are most likely just to slip into obscurity. An idea that never really gained the momentum it needed to survive.
quote:
There's something organic about the whole thing - which is only to be expected if we take the 'body' analogies seriously.
I think religious ideas need some special kind of sauce to be retained - or have much influence - beyond the initial generations. I'm not clear what that is, but it doesn't seem to be something that Mennonite ideas have in the UK.
But then, I could be wrong. Some ideas seem to have a habit of being continually dug up when they look like they're properly dead and given new life by a new group of people. Maybe that's what will happen with the Anabaptists.
I hope so.
Posted by Jengie jon (# 273) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Nick Tamen:
quote:
Originally posted by Enoch:
As for the claim not to be Protestant, there's plenty of evidence from the Ship that there are some CofE and Episcopalian shipmates who claim not to be Protestant either and with about as much validity.
I've known of Lutherans who claim not to be Protestant. I have a hard time getting my head around that one.
Not really difficult if you are aware that there is more than British meanings to these words. They are not opposing "Protestant" to "Roman Catholic" but to "Evangelical" and in continental European terms that are basically "Reformed" vs "Lutheran". So all they are saying is "We are not Calvinist".
Jengie
Posted by Bibaculus (# 18528) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Enoch:
Tangent alert
quote:
Originally posted by cliffdweller:
... my son went to a Mennonite middle/high school that focused on "restorative justice." It really shaped every aspect of what they were studying as well as how the school itself was run. Things like student discipline problems were handled in a very distinctive way quite different from what we'd see at other schools, even Christian schools. It's a way of life-- one we found quite appealing and really had a huge impact on our son's life and character.
I recognise that this is a tangent, but I'd picked up the impression on the Ship that the separation of Church and State in the US Constitution is interpreted to mean that schools in the USA have to be ostentatiously secular, that there's nothing corresponding to what we call a V A School. Is there some sort of compromise area on this after all?
State schools cannot be denominational, but denominations can run independent schools if they wish. Naturally they receive no state funding.
Posted by Nick Tamen (# 15164) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Jengie jon:
quote:
Originally posted by Nick Tamen:
quote:
Originally posted by Enoch:
As for the claim not to be Protestant, there's plenty of evidence from the Ship that there are some CofE and Episcopalian shipmates who claim not to be Protestant either and with about as much validity.
I've known of Lutherans who claim not to be Protestant. I have a hard time getting my head around that one.
Not really difficult if you are aware that there is more than British meanings to these words. They are not opposing "Protestant" to "Roman Catholic" but to "Evangelical" and in continental European terms that are basically "Reformed" vs "Lutheran". So all they are saying is "We are not Calvinist".
There are British Lutherans? ![[Big Grin]](biggrin.gif)
Seriously though, I'm American and it's American Lutherans I've heard say it. And that is hard to get my head around.
Posted by Jengie jon (# 273) on
:
There are. Have you got any idea how few? Well not quite on the Mennonite level but still. Oh, and they are usually of German or Scandinavian descent!
But you have "Evangelical Lutheran Church of America" and the "Evangelical" is the same use there as "not Protestant" above.
Jengie
[ 19. March 2016, 14:09: Message edited by: Jengie jon ]
Posted by cliffdweller (# 13338) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Enoch:
Tangent alert
quote:
Originally posted by cliffdweller:
... my son went to a Mennonite middle/high school that focused on "restorative justice." It really shaped every aspect of what they were studying as well as how the school itself was run. Things like student discipline problems were handled in a very distinctive way quite different from what we'd see at other schools, even Christian schools. It's a way of life-- one we found quite appealing and really had a huge impact on our son's life and character.
I recognise that this is a tangent, but I'd picked up the impression on the Ship that the separation of Church and State in the US Constitution is interpreted to mean that schools in the USA have to be ostentatiously secular, that there's nothing corresponding to what we call a V A School. Is there some sort of compromise area on this after all?
Public schools absolutely must be secular, private schools do not, and often are founded with the express purpose of providing a religious perspective*. The two other schools I was comparing the Mennonite school to reflect two of the most common US types of schools-- public schools and evangelical schools (there's also of course a vibrant system of Catholic schools, and then a wide variety of other sorts of schools with specific educational and/or religious bents). I'd never heard of "voluntary aided" school before but from your link it sounds like it would correspond to our private schools.
*(Am I remembering correctly that "public school" and "private school" have different meanings in UK than in US? For us, public schools are those funded by the government, free to students within their district. Private schools are supported primarily by tuition paid by parents and by voluntary donations/grants, and have far less government oversight/control).
[ 19. March 2016, 14:36: Message edited by: cliffdweller ]
Posted by Jengie jon (# 273) on
:
Yes
Public Schools are the top private schools and we refer to what you call "Public Schools" as "State Schools" but that covers a multitude of differing fundings models.
The BBC gives a outline of schools in England
Jengie
Posted by Nick Tamen (# 15164) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Jengie jon:
But you have "Evangelical Lutheran Church of America" and the "Evangelical" is the same use there as "not Protestant" above.
No, I do think it is—at least not according to any Lutherans I know. When I have heard Lutherans here talk abut the use of "evangelical" in the ELCA, they have said pretty much the opposite—that it means "Protestant," though admittedly not of the Reformed variety.
Posted by Nick Tamen (# 15164) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Nick Tamen:
No, I do think it is . . . .
Sorry. That should have been "I don't think it is."
Posted by mdijon (# 8520) on
:
It may be that Lutherans claiming not to be protestants are trying to emphasize a continuity with the Catholic Church in terms of liturgical practice and sacraments - in the same way that Anglicans occasionally announce that they aren't protestant to make a similar point.
Posted by Nick Tamen (# 15164) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by mdijon:
It may be that Lutherans claiming not to be protestants are trying to emphasize a continuity with the Catholic Church in terms of liturgical practice and sacraments - in the same way that Anglicans occasionally announce that they aren't protestant to make a similar point.
They are, I think. The Lutherans I have heard say it are typically from the Evangelical Catholic wing of Lutheranism. It's just odd when denominational websites and sources describe Lutherans as the "original" or "oldest" Protestants.
Posted by Enoch (# 14322) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Nick Tamen:
They are, I think. The Lutherans I have heard say it are typically from the Evangelical Catholic wing of Lutheranism. It's just odd when denominational websites and sources describe Lutherans as the "original" or "oldest" Protestants.
Which, oddly, also isn't correct. The Moravians are.
Posted by Jengie jon (# 273) on
:
Well, they are Hussite who are commonly held to be. The Waldensians also pre-date the Lutherans.
Jengie
[ 21. March 2016, 10:39: Message edited by: Jengie jon ]
Posted by MSHB (# 9228) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Jengie jon:
Well, they are Hussite who are commonly held to be. The Waldensians also pre-date the Lutherans.
Jengie
Waldensians date from the 12th century - well before the Lutherans or the Reformation.
Hussites date from early 15th century, I think.
Posted by Nick Tamen (# 15164) on
:
True on Waldensians, Moravians and Hussites. But the Lutherans were the first to be called "Protestant." My Moravian friends (we have a fair number of Moravians around here) will say, somewhat jokingly, "we're Protestants who've been around longer than the Protestants have."
Posted by Lamb Chopped (# 5528) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Jengie jon:
quote:
Originally posted by Nick Tamen:
quote:
Originally posted by Enoch:
As for the claim not to be Protestant, there's plenty of evidence from the Ship that there are some CofE and Episcopalian shipmates who claim not to be Protestant either and with about as much validity.
I've known of Lutherans who claim not to be Protestant. I have a hard time getting my head around that one.
Not really difficult if you are aware that there is more than British meanings to these words. They are not opposing "Protestant" to "Roman Catholic" but to "Evangelical" and in continental European terms that are basically "Reformed" vs "Lutheran". So all they are saying is "We are not Calvinist".
Jengie
It's a bit more complicated than that.
It starts with the view that Luther and many Lutherans had, that it was not they who had departed from the apostolic faith, but rather Rome. The original Lutherans had no intention of leaving the RC church, but rather of reforming it. When they got the boot via papal bull and excommunication, there were therefore quite a few who questioned which side of the schism was in fact entitled to the term "original"--and those folks wouldn't be happy with the term "Protestant" insofar as it suggests "we left the church."
So there's that idea kicking around.
Of course, you've got to call people something, and as various movements were springing up all over the place ranging from the serious to the seriously wacky, you've got to distinguish yourself from those folks too--not just the Calvinists but the Anabaptists, the "enthusiasts" of all stripes, and the downright cultist. Luther hated the idea of calling us "Lutherans" (which well he should have), and so took to "evangelische", but now that's causing us problems with confusion with others who use the term "evangelical" (or in our Vietnamese context, Tinh Lanh) and teach very different ideas.
Which is all to say things are screwed up, as usual.
Posted by Qoheleth. (# 9265) on
:
It's worth noting the Bridge Builders, which was nurtured in the London Mennonite Centre, is still alive and thriving as an independent charity, working to improve how churches handle conflict.
quote:
Churches do not "do conflict" very well
Peace-making and reconciliation are key ideas in the teaching of Jesus, but in Christian communities they are often a weak element of the culture. So when there is disagreement and tension amongst Christians in the church, they can find themselves struggling.
Posted by Carex (# 9643) on
:
Another bit of tangent...
I thought of this thread last weekend when I was driving the back roads in a neighboring county and came across a building labeled, "Old German Baptist Brethren Church". (Not to be confused, it turns out, with the "Old Brethren German Baptist Church".)
Consulting Wikipedia it seems that this is another Anabaptist group that practices pacifism, plain dress and simple living, along with the Amish and Mennonites. It would appear that this is the only such congregation in Oregon and one of only 9 within 1000 miles or so, making it a rather sparse denomination in this part of the country. (And those numbers were before the great schism of 2009...)
I'm curious how difficult it is to keep such an isolated congregation going, and how similar that is to the situation of the British Mennonites.
© Ship of Fools 2016
UBB.classicTM
6.5.0