Anabaptists, Mennonites, & Amish

  • Thread starter Thread starter Eric_Prine
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
E

Eric_Prine

Guest
I have a friend who has gotten into an Anabaptist theology of “two kingdoms”- this idea that Christians should abstain from politics and having a voice in it and this idea that we should just stick to dealing within our own Christian communities and not try to appeal to morality in the secular world. He says that the early Church abstained from public office. And though I do believe things may have had some negative effects when religion and politics had gotten intertwined many times throughout history in both the East and West- my friend takes this as proof the Church had lost focus on Christ and became a self serving institution.

Does anyone have any suggestions for him to be more open to the validity of the Catholic & Orthodox Churches? I’m Catholic, but we have a mutual Orthodox friend and both me and the Orthodox tend to tag team on debating some of his posts online,
 
The early Church abstained from public office? He has not studied the Early Church.
 
what does your friend consider the “early Church”? 2 days after Pentecost?

Emperor Constantine, who many consider to have been a “closet Christian” through most of his reign as Emperor (before his baptism). Once he made Christianity legal, there were many Christians involved with Government affairs.

Let’s also use some logic… assuming the anabaptist views are correct, then one day all people should be anabaptist. If all people are anabaptist or if one nation was entirely anabaptist, how would the community function without a government? they would be forced to have a civil government (even if it was run by their church community, it’s still a civil government).

So it’s simply not a logical view.
 
phil19034 said:
Let’s also use some logic… assuming the anabaptist views are correct, then one day all people should be anabaptist. If all people are anabaptist or if one nation was entirely anabaptist, how would the community function without a government? they would be forced to have a civil government (even if it was run by their church community, it’s still a civil government).

So it’s simply not a logical view.
Click to expand...
Very good point- thank you. He believes that once the 12 apostles died, the Church slowly kept drifting from the truth. That any organic changes equal deviation from what Christ intended. That the Ante-Nicene writers were against getting to involved in the world around them, but that by the time government and the Church started speaking relations, that it was too watered down to really be a light of Christ.
I think most of his ideas are a bit simplistic personally.
 
Eric_Prine said:
He believes that once the 12 apostles died, the Church slowly kept drifting from the truth.
Click to expand...
I always begin to get skeptical when some self-styled theologian starts to speak about the “truth” because oh so often the “truth” happens to be what they agree with.

What does you friend consider to be the “truth”?
 
Eric_Prine said:
Very good point- thank you. He believes that once the 12 apostles died, the Church slowly kept drifting from the truth. That any organic changes equal deviation from what Christ intendeded.
Click to expand...
This is actually a pretty common idea among certain Protestant groups.

I was Mennonite before I became Catholic. They tend to be pretty skeptical of government, to varying degrees. It probably comes from the fact that many early anabaptists were put to death by the governments of the various Catholic/Lutheran/Calvinist countries that they were from. Furthermore, persecuted anabaptists probably identified pretty strongly with the early martyrs in the Bible and the early Church, who were also put to death by their governments in many cases. This is probably where that mentality comes from.
 
Lost_Sheep said:
I always begin to get skeptical when some self-styled theologian starts to speak about the “truth” because oh so often the “truth” happens to be what they agree with.

What does you friend consider to be the “truth”?
Click to expand...
This is a good point, when talking to anabaptists, or any Protestants for that matter. A lot of people simply don’t look at the big picture, and only accept what they’ve been brought up to believe as ‘true.’
 
ctb95 said:
This is a good point, when talking to anabaptists, or any Protestants for that matter. A lot of people simply don’t look at the big picture, and only accept what they’ve been brought up to believe as ‘true.’
Click to expand...
Could you explain how that is different from those who have been raised in Catholic homes?
 
Wannano said:
Could you explain how that is different from those who have been raised in Catholic homes?
Click to expand...
It’s not. Lots of Catholics grow up simply accepting what they believe as well. However, Catholic theology has a consistent logic to it. Many Protestants, for example, simply accept the Bible as true without any explanation as to why.
 
Wannano said:
Could you explain how that is different from those who have been raised in Catholic homes?
Click to expand...
If you accept the idea that the Catholic Church was founded by Christ himself, then Catholic theology establishes a baseline for the “truth.” Many or most Protestant denominations did not accept the truth as the Catholic Church taught it (Martin Luther, for example), and broke away and formed their own “truth.”
 
Lost_Sheep said:
If you accept the idea that the Catholic Church was founded by Christ himself, then Catholic theology establishes a baseline for the “truth.” Many or most Protestant denominations did not accept the truth as the Catholic Church taught it (Martin Luther, for example), and broke away and formed their own “truth.”
Click to expand...
I don’t quite understand how that applies to my comment.
 
Eric_Prine said:
I have a friend who has gotten into an Anabaptist theology of “two kingdoms”- this idea that Christians should abstain from politics and having a voice in it and this idea that we should just stick to dealing within our own Christian communities and not try to appeal to morality in the secular world. He says that the early Church abstained from public office. And though I do believe things may have had some negative effects when religion and politics had gotten intertwined many times throughout history in both the East and West- my friend takes this as proof the Church had lost focus on Christ and became a self serving institution.
Click to expand...
Interestingly enough, I’m in a similar situation. One of my friends says pretty much the same things as your friend. He also identifies as an absolute pacifist, condemns short sleeves and musical instruments in worship, and claims that Christmas and wedding rings are pagan. This website seems to represent his beliefs almost exactly. I’ve tried to discuss the differences between our faiths for months, but he is extremely stubborn. Whenever I make a point, he changes the topic by quoting something from Matthew 5. He says that the way we can identify the “true Church” is by seeing who is doing things the closest to how the early Christians did it, but he doesn’t seem to see how the early Church is still with us today. I would be eager for any advice as well!
 
Wannano said:
Reread posts 7,8 and 9 and ask me more if it’s unclear. 🙂
Click to expand...
OK. Let me try again.

I think anyone who grows up in a religious household is going to believe what they are taught to believe; whether you are Catholic, Protestant, Anabaptist, or whatever. In answer to your question, Catholics are no different in that respect.

My original response addressed the question “What is the ‘truth’?” or more specifically, “What is the ‘real truth’?” and I argued that if one accepts the idea that Catholicism’s “truth” is the baseline for all of Christianity then any other “truths” aren’t really the “truth.”

(Whew!) Does that help? 🙂
 
Lost_Sheep said:
OK. Let me try again.

I think anyone who grows up in a religious household is going to believe what they are taught to believe; whether you are Catholic, Protestant, Anabaptist, or whatever. In answer to your question, Catholics are no different in that respect.

My original response addressed the question “What is the ‘truth’?” or more specifically, “What is the ‘real truth’?” and I argued that if one accepts the idea that Catholicism’s “truth” is the baseline for all of Christianity then any other “truths” aren’t really the “truth.”

(Whew!) Does that help? 🙂
Click to expand...
Oh, ok, yes that helps. That little word “if” has huge consequences dosen’t it?
 
Wannano said:
Oh, ok, yes that helps. That little word “if” has huge consequences dosen’t it?
Click to expand...
Here is another difference. The Catholic Church has Dogma, Doctine & Discipline; typically written down, that we can compare and contrast theological concepts and beliefs against.

We also have the Catechism for average Catholics to reference.

Because Protestants do not have such a thing, it is the reason they are all over the board theologically. It’s also the reason they slide all over the theological spectrum. Granted one individual denomination may remain the same over time, however Protestanism as a whole is wide spread theologically. That said, I’m sure that the theology of some individual denominations have changed over time.

That’s the difference. When a Catholic believes something that goes against the Catholic Faith, we have resources to refer them to. Protestants typically don’t outside of someone’s personal interpretation of The Bible.
 
Eric_Prine said:
I have a friend who has gotten into an Anabaptist theology of “two kingdoms”- this idea that Christians should abstain from politics and having a voice in it and this idea that we should just stick to dealing within our own Christian communities and not try to appeal to morality in the secular world. He says that the early Church abstained from public office. And though I do believe things may have had some negative effects when religion and politics had gotten intertwined many times throughout history in both the East and West- my friend takes this as proof the Church had lost focus on Christ and became a self serving institution.

Does anyone have any suggestions for him to be more open to the validity of the Catholic & Orthodox Churches? I’m Catholic, but we have a mutual Orthodox friend and both me and the Orthodox tend to tag team on debating some of his posts online,
Click to expand...
I’ve never once read of the Anabaptists using ‘Two Kingdoms’ terminology. That’s a decidedly Lutheran term that’s never been used to justify Christian disengagement with government, but rather to simply acknowledge that the State and Church cannot compel each other to do things outside of their exclusive areas of focus. To put is simply, there is a seperation of Church and State, with one saving souls and the other saving lives. The Two Kingdoms does not in any way bar a Christian from holding public office or joining the army.

Solid readings: lcms.org/page.aspx?pid=869

Solid video: youtube.com/watch?v=oLVKdYl383A

Mostly ok overview: en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Two_kingdoms_doctrine
 
SyroMalankara said:
The early Church abstained from public office? He has not studied the Early Church.
Click to expand...
In the first 3 centuries of Christianity, holding public office was a big issue. Christians were not supposed to be i high-ranking positions, because of the pagan celebrations and entertainment they would be expected to hold and preside over. It did happen that they held those offices, but they were excluded from their community for the duration of their post.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top