A good Mennonite friend of mine
from Buhler, Kansas, posted the attached video onto her Facebook™
Timeline.
Obviously, I have disclosed that I fellowship with a Roman Catholic group on Saturday evenings when in Chicago (no – I am Mennonite, not Catholic). I fellowship with them because I enjoy the method by which they delve into the scripture readings for the service and because I have found within the Roman Catholic church a continued, obstinate dedication to old Mennonite values such as Communitarianism, Pacifism, Social Outreach, personalism or Pietism in one’s relationship to Christ, and Grace – especially amongst the orders (Franciscans, Jesuits, Vincentians and the Poor Claire’s).
Having similarly attended numerous fellow Evangelical services, I have
found myself all too often discouraged that while many churches share a commitment
to Biblicism and the Evangelical message, I have left too many of these services
feeling that the fruits from that service were negative, judgmental or
counter-productive – or just as often, having experienced what I often refer to
as Evangelical-lite – meaning that I experienced Truth but was leaving the
service still spiritually hungry. I have
found certain Roman Catholic services and a few Evangelical Free Services to be
a better mix for my own personal spiritual needs and “character.” So I am a bit ecumenical by nature. (Clarification, in saying this, I am stating
that I believe that each individual has different needs and will find those
needs met in different settings. The characteristics and needs of the New Testament churches were likewise greatly divergent and relative to their situation.)
That is not to say that I agree with fellow Catholic Christians
regarding infant baptism – but even in that regard, I have found my former
understanding of their theology to be a bit over-simplified and am comfortable
that a Roman Catholic who has completed the Catechistic process to be
potentially every bit as much the adult believer as are Mennonites. That being said, I have wondered about the
very close political ties between groups such as the Southern Baptist
Conference and certain Anglican, Presbyterian and Lutheran churches – how can
they, and we, cooperate so closely when the latter three churches also practice
or do not exclude infant baptism. Our
Mennonite churches in Congo / Zaire are part of the same ministerial structure as
the pedo-baptists. How can one group be
judged so harshly and the others just as easily forgiven? I have not yet received a great explanation
in that regard.
Initially,
my response to the above captioned video was to note that I found it a bit
simplistic and mentioned that I have known too many fellow Christian spirits in
the Catholic church to doubt their faith – these are people who consider
themselves to be orthodox Catholics.
My recommendation was that we focus on what unites us and let God sort
out the differences in the way that God will.
Then, I had the bright
idea of looking up what CARM had to say about Mennonites – and Matt Slick has
actually not only addressed the Mennonites, but unlike many professional
teachers of apologetics, he addressed not the so-called “works-oriented”
Mennonites (which is what we evangelical Mennonites call the traditional
Mennonites and Amish, including our own fellow Russlander Alt Koloniers and
Kleine Gemeinde), but he addressed rather the Canadian Mennonite Brethren
Conference’s Statement of Faith directly.
The MB are in every sense of the word just as Evangelical as the former
EMB, the now-termed FEC and the old Krimmer Mennonite Brethren – we are all
Baptist Christians.
Slick’s
reaction was honest and useful:
“Canadian Conference of Mennonite Brethren Churches - a few days ago someone e-mailed me about
a comment I made on the radio show concerning the Mennonites. He sent me
their statement of faith. After looking it over, I was rather
discouraged. It wasn't clear enough on the Trinity, the personhood of the
Holy Spirit, and Christ's physical resurrection. So, I called them
up. It turns out that the Mennonites do affirm the Orthodox doctrine of
the Trinity, the personhood of the Holy Spirit, and Christ's physical
resurrection in a glorified body. I told him that the statement of faith
was insufficient. I also was very polite and I did not want to sound like
I was the doctrine Czar and was judging his denomination. Instead, I
informed him that a lot of their statements could be affirmed by the Mormons
and Jehovah's Witnesses and that it was rather insufficient in a few important
areas. It was a good conversation. He thanked me and said that he
would bring the matter up to the counsel. Praise God. Hopefully,
they will modify their statement of faith and make it more
"pristine".”
By the way, if you want to see the CARM statement of faith go to http://www.carm.org/statement-faith. (http://carm.org/newsletter-08-30-10 , downloaded 08 May, 2012, 18:11 pm).
Honestly, I find his
openness and dialogue useful, interesting and worthy of consideration. Yet based on his examination of the Roman
Catholic video (the general web-site more blatantly places the Roman Catholics
on par with Mormons, Jehovah’s Witnesses and Muslims), I was still a bit
unsettled. I have noted before that even
though the MB Statement of Faith is more doctrinaire than is that of the old
EMB or the FEBC, but that even the MB publication seems to leave a bit of room
for congregational discussion. Recall, I
have been a member of both conferences.
Also, my friend, who posted the video, is a member of a Mennonite
Brethren congregation in Kansas.
So then, the question is raised whether or not Slick’s observations
should be passed on to the MB conference.
The simple answer is sure, why not.
Should they listen to him?
This is where being an evangelical Mennonite gets dicey. Normally, we pretty much buy into the greater
socio-political structure of the American Religious Far Right, though I would
argue that we often do a decent job of maintaining both centrist and
Fundamentalist versions of Anglo-American Evangelicalism within our
congregations and Sunday Schools.
But, where is Slick coming from?
Are we accepting his credentials based on his personal testimony and the
obvious success of his media ministry?
Yes and no – or rather yes, we are listening to his testimony – that is
what we, as Anabaptists do. And no – we
might be perhaps a bit too quick to accept his opinion based on media success
rather than on content.
If you follow this website,
we end up with a couple of important pieces of additional information – Slick
is part of the Reformed Church (the Calvinists of Switzerland and the
Netherlands). He is also a charismatic.
Importantly, I value his efforts and insights, so I am more than happy
to inclu:e him in our dialogue… however, the differences between Evangelical
Anabaptism and Dutch Calvinism are pretty major… my concern is that while he
has access to our dialogue – is he willing to likewise listen to us? I am not so sure.
Most disturbingly, the Calvinists were actually the first to martyr the
self-identified Anabaptists. The
Calvinists have long been a state church demonstrably willing to use the force
of law to their benefit and against others.
The Calvinists have had their own weird way of dealing with infant
baptism, social church membership and predestination – a rather awkward accommodation
to state and financial power and authority that I have never been fully
convinced of – especially when they are throwing rocks at Roman Catholic
windows. Finally, Pietism, the term by
which Evangelical Mennonism is most closely defined, came about because of a
certain spiritual deadness observed within the Prussian Protestant Church – a
church comprised equally of the Calvinist Reform movement and Lutheranism. This leaves me with lots of questions…
Secondly, his website indicates that the Anglo-American Baptist movement
sprang from Anabaptist roots – a complicated historical understanding that is
far more popular these days within Southern Baptist understandings of history
than within traditional Anabaptist orthodox historicism. Again, I more-or-less say pitch a big tent
and welcome all to the love feast who desire to attend, but at the same time,
Slick’s ministry is in apologetics and he makes a living off of excluding
others from Christ’s church.
Finally, he is a Charismatic Reformed Christian. I have read his statement, and include the
link below. Personally, I do not find it
too be super radical. In fact, while I
disagree with his findings, I yet find his perspective to be reasonable and
worthy of consideration.
Beginning with Münster, Mennonites have long shied away from spiritual
gifts and prophecy – especially as a sign of the Elect. Every century or so, we seem to have a
Mennonite or Amish prophet rise up on his or her own claims – and are usually
around to pick up the pieces in love that are left behind. Again, there is room in the tent, but it is
not an emotionally charismatic tent.
Proceed with caution and don’t go changing a 150-year-old statement of
faith based on a contemporary, charismatic radio ministry.
One doctrine that Mennonites have traditionally been united on is the
doctrine of the Fruits of the Spirit – as in the popular Evangelical or AGAPE
musical Music Machine. We have all,
evangelical and traditional, been a bit more preoccupied with spiritual fruit
than with spiritual gifts.
I am not a seminarian
or a preacher – and am not providing either an apologetic or counter-apologetic
to Rev. Slick’s ministry. I am just
making a few research observations for consideration. As far as I can tell, much of what he has to
say is compelling and good for thought – but anytime anyone wants to exclude
others over the splitting of theological hairs – we need first to determine
what that teacher’s tolerance of our own theology seemingly is, and then
whether or not the lack of tolerance on the part of one is a healthy addition
either to our own self-identity or to that of the greater Christian faith to
which we ascribe. Again, I would err
more on the side of “Accept them all – Let God sort them out!”
No comments:
Post a Comment