Kansas Church/Community Identity
I've been giving some thought to the matter of church/community identity--ours in particular--and realized one big thing: I can't write much about this without more information from other people. I also realized that there are at least three distinct parts to identity: 1. Reality or Truth (what God sees) 2. What local people see 3. What non-local people see.
The goal in identifying who we are is to arrive at an understanding of what God sees. Within the limitations we all have, the other two can help us get closer to that ultimate reality in item number one. For that reason, I'm asking for help. Please comment here or email me (miriam@iwashige.com) to provide input. Although some context would be very helpful, I'm asking for only one identifier from each person who responds: Local or Non-local. That simply distinguishes between those who live here and those who don't live here.
One helpful but optional add-on to these two identifiers is to add wanderer, native, immigrant, or emigrant, whichever of these applies. "Wanderer" means that this has been home-base for most of your life, but you have also spent significant time living elsewhere, perhaps in studying or teaching, voluntary service, or missions endeavors. "Native" means you were born here and presumably still live here. "Immigrant" means that you were born elsewhere but moved to this church/community later. "Emigrant" means you have roots here but now live elsewhere. I think input from these last two categories is especially valuable because of what one learns by comparison. I hope the comparison process will benefit everyone involved, and not fall into that kind of comparison process that Scripture warns against.
Other context can be added informally in whatever form is convenient. Here are some things you might consider:
1. How well do you know our community? (Have you ever visited here? Have you spent time in people's homes? How many people do you know? How much time have you spent with people from here? Did your contact occur in a formal or informal venue? Over what time span have you been accumulating your information?)
2. Who or what figures big in whatever you're comparing our community to? (I guess this probably will depend on what other church/community identities you've been exposed to.)
3. What features appeal to you or disenchant you about our church/community? (This will no doubt involve focusing on distinctives of this church/community.)
In scrolling through my own thoughts about our church/community, I realized that the comments I've heard so far from others have been mostly positive. This is perfectly understandable because people are usually too kind--or maybe too afraid--to share their less generous thoughts. I do wish to welcome here all honest impressions--positive or negative. I wish also to welcome responses of any length or complexity. If one sentence is all you wish to write, that's OK. On the flip side, don't hesitate to write long answers if you wish to do so. Feel free to email this post to anyone you think might be interested. An icon at the bottom of the post makes this very easy if you know the email address of the other person.
For now I'll refrain from revealing my own impressions from a local/wanderer/native perspective. I will also wait to pass on words I've heard from non-locals. Several years ago, for a class project, a group of Kansas Faith Builders students carried out a survey of Center Church people's views on a variety of issues. I'm not referencing that at the moment, although doing so at some point might be instructive.
At the risk of sounding pathetic, I'm issuing the equivalent of whatever version of begging, pleading, or crying that might motivate you to respond to my question on our church/community identity. I eagerly await your response.
The goal in identifying who we are is to arrive at an understanding of what God sees. Within the limitations we all have, the other two can help us get closer to that ultimate reality in item number one. For that reason, I'm asking for help. Please comment here or email me (miriam@iwashige.com) to provide input. Although some context would be very helpful, I'm asking for only one identifier from each person who responds: Local or Non-local. That simply distinguishes between those who live here and those who don't live here.
One helpful but optional add-on to these two identifiers is to add wanderer, native, immigrant, or emigrant, whichever of these applies. "Wanderer" means that this has been home-base for most of your life, but you have also spent significant time living elsewhere, perhaps in studying or teaching, voluntary service, or missions endeavors. "Native" means you were born here and presumably still live here. "Immigrant" means that you were born elsewhere but moved to this church/community later. "Emigrant" means you have roots here but now live elsewhere. I think input from these last two categories is especially valuable because of what one learns by comparison. I hope the comparison process will benefit everyone involved, and not fall into that kind of comparison process that Scripture warns against.
Other context can be added informally in whatever form is convenient. Here are some things you might consider:
1. How well do you know our community? (Have you ever visited here? Have you spent time in people's homes? How many people do you know? How much time have you spent with people from here? Did your contact occur in a formal or informal venue? Over what time span have you been accumulating your information?)
2. Who or what figures big in whatever you're comparing our community to? (I guess this probably will depend on what other church/community identities you've been exposed to.)
3. What features appeal to you or disenchant you about our church/community? (This will no doubt involve focusing on distinctives of this church/community.)
In scrolling through my own thoughts about our church/community, I realized that the comments I've heard so far from others have been mostly positive. This is perfectly understandable because people are usually too kind--or maybe too afraid--to share their less generous thoughts. I do wish to welcome here all honest impressions--positive or negative. I wish also to welcome responses of any length or complexity. If one sentence is all you wish to write, that's OK. On the flip side, don't hesitate to write long answers if you wish to do so. Feel free to email this post to anyone you think might be interested. An icon at the bottom of the post makes this very easy if you know the email address of the other person.
For now I'll refrain from revealing my own impressions from a local/wanderer/native perspective. I will also wait to pass on words I've heard from non-locals. Several years ago, for a class project, a group of Kansas Faith Builders students carried out a survey of Center Church people's views on a variety of issues. I'm not referencing that at the moment, although doing so at some point might be instructive.
At the risk of sounding pathetic, I'm issuing the equivalent of whatever version of begging, pleading, or crying that might motivate you to respond to my question on our church/community identity. I eagerly await your response.
posted by Mrs. I (Miriam Iwashige) at
8:35 AM
9 Comments:
I am a local immigrant of more than a decade. I've been very connected with the community, but since I didn't grow up here, I don't know nearly everything about the people and community.
Several impressions, both positive and negative:
1.) I like the educational options available in KS, as well as the general positive attitude about education. The schools are taught by teachers who really care about quality education. Homeschoolers have access to a variety of resources. Higher education is not scoffed at, but largely seen as a valuable tool.
2.) Materialism does not seem to be as big of an issue here as it is in some communities (including ones I have lived in before). Sadly, that is changing. But I am impressed that even the richest people in the community live in modest homes. You can drive an old clunker of a car without being very embarrassed. I like this.
3.) The community here seems to be rather happy-go-lucky and friendly...but the sad part is that it is not a very missional group of people. Center has a number of foreign workers and also spearheaded Rise Kids Church and Hands of Christ, so it has done more about the state of the world than the other churches. But I know for a fact that at least one of the Beachy churches does not even have any kind of mission or vision statement, and that definitely shows up in how life is lived and what is expected of the members. For instance, reading the youth activities in the Plain Talk is sickening. All these youth that ought to be trained to plant churches are spending their time playing six-square. If we're all totally content with our own happy pile, wow, that is really sad. And the saddest part is that the young children will grow up thinking this is normal.
4.) Related to the above, I have been puzzled by the resistance I've sensed to people being personally led by God. A big focus of the community is to be called by the brotherhood and have God's will revealed to the brotherhood. But then the brotherhood does very little to call people to the work God wants for them, or to work with them to develop their giftings. This is just my opinion, but I think this is why the community is shifting toward materialism. People need something to dream about, to work for, to pour their resources into. So now that energy and desire is being channeled into big buildings, etc. I am grieved by this.
I do love the people here and I pray that we can seek God's face to learn to know what He wants for this community.
By
Anonymous, at 12/05/2014
This was an email comment:
Although we've only lived here a bit more than five years, I've known many folks here much longer. As a relatively new-comer, one thing I appreciate is the church and community's stability. It's a healthy place for families, a safe place for hurting people, a place where growth happens.
Perhaps one negative is the assumption by some that what we've always done is good, and therefore resist the idea of change. New ideas need to be discussed for hours by every angle, making them a much bigger issue than is often necessary.
I'm eager to read more...
Sharon
By
Mrs. I (Miriam Iwashige), at 12/07/2014
Here's another email comment from a local emigrant, J. Sam Nisly:
What is the identity of our church/community?
Miriam listed:
1. Reality or Truth (what God sees)
2. What local people see
3. What non-local people see
Lloyd Kwast talks about something similar when he describes culture.
1. Behavior (What is done?)
2. Values (What is good or best?)
3. Beliefs (What is true?)
4. Worldview (What is real?)
Explanation for the Lloyd Kwast model: Think layers of an onion.
Here’s a link---home.snu.edu/~hculbert/kwast.htm
Mostly, just remember that each level affects the one above it.
My worldview determines my beliefs.
My beliefs determine my values.
My values determine my behavior.
When we combine these two lists (Miriam’s and Lloyd’s)—
Non-local people see our behavior and values.
Locals see our values and beliefs.
God sees our beliefs and worldview.
So, in answer to the identity question—
Does what we do determine our identity?
Does what we value determine our identity?
Does what we believe determine our identity?
Does our world view determine our identity?
Personally, it tends to get fuzzy when we get down to beliefs (level 3) to worldview (level 4). It does seem however, that our community’s identity is determined on a deep level.
Lloyd Kwast helpfully points out the difference between operating beliefs and theoretical beliefs. Operating beliefs—(beliefs that affect values and behavior) vs. Theoretical beliefs—(stated creeds which have little practical impact on values and behavior)
So, in conclusion, who are we? What is our identity? Our identity is determined by our operating beliefs……what we believe in our hearts….the belief system that we act out of when under stress.
May God grant us the courage to change what can be changed, the grace accept what can’t be changed AND the discernment to know the difference.
By
Mrs. I (Miriam Iwashige), at 12/07/2014
If you're following this thread, you may respond to the above comments as well as my original post, if you wish. I'm grateful for the input so far.
By
Mrs. I (Miriam Iwashige), at 12/07/2014
I am an immigrant. I've lived here for 23 years. Exactly as long as I lived before I lived here. I don't know if it's because I moved here in young adulthood and my homing pattern was already firmly established, or what, but I still feel like I have an outsider status.
So from that position, here are some of the observations I have about this community that interest me most.
The most interesting thing to me is how this community has navigated modernity. The most enlightening book on this topic is Ervin Stutzman's "Tobias of the Amish". It's my observation that this community, in the process of becoming an old established community, is actually a relatively young and pristine example of how a progressive Amish (in spite of the Mennonite affiliation, it is NOT Mennonite, even our church.) community negotiates change.
So, since I've labeled this community as a "progressive Amish" community, it is very interesting to me what the future will look like. Is it reasonable to compare it to other older communities, like, for example, Illinois, or Indiana? I don't think it's terribly useful to compare it to PA, because that is far older, and many of the dynamic factors happened long before the 20th century, but I could be wrong. If anything, a comparable community is possibly Kalona, IA....At any rate, thinking about this is quite interesting to me, and I would love picking your or others brains about sometime.
By
Unknown, at 12/07/2014
This comment has been removed by the author.
By
Mrs. I (Miriam Iwashige), at 12/08/2014
Sharon Nisly, do you care to elaborate on how you're distinguishing between being progressive Amish and being Mennonite? In other words, HOW has this community navigated modernity? The Kalona, Iowa comparison is interesting to me. I have lots of close relatives there. While I do see some similarities, I believe the Beachy church there and here are less similar than is the case with Beachy churches in some of the other communities you named. That does not address the larger community identity. (BTW, I removed the comment above in order to edit the punctuation--which I wouldn't have bothered with if I had known the removal information would remain.)
By
Mrs. I (Miriam Iwashige), at 12/08/2014
Here's another comment that came as an email:
Things I appreciate about this community include
--Marriages are celebrated. Children are welcomed and treasured.
--Singles are not "singled out" but recognized and accepted as viable community and church members, and not pressured to get married.
--I don't feel "out of style" even when I wear dresses that I have had for a long time.
--I don't feel pressure to have a snazzy, sharp-looking, late-model vehicle.
--The rumor mill is rusty and often out of order.
--Dialogue is enjoyed and encouraged, even if you don't agree.
--Ministers are humble and approachable, ready to discuss questions and concerns of the members.
--When people sense a call to missions, they feel free to bring it to the church. While serving, some of them receive financial support from individuals in the church (others are self-supporting or supported by an organization). All are prayed for.
--Visitors in church are warmly welcomed, sometimes so much so that it is hard to get a turn to talk to them.
--Relationships are amiable and congenial between churches in the community.
--Churches frequently help furnish food after there is a death in another church.
Yes, there are some exceptions. We are not perfect.
I am a native and a current resident of this community but have lived elsewhere for more than 1/3 of my life. I am grateful to be a part of this community. --Linda
By
Mrs. I (Miriam Iwashige), at 12/11/2014
As I understand it, the Mennonite mentality tends to be more hierarchical, and the Amish mentality is more congregational. So when you look at history and how these groups have navigated modern life, I think two patterns emerge. (Well, at least since the mid to late 1800's)The Mennonites were influenced by Revivalism which was basically a modernist concept. This created a codifying of doctrine and practice from the top down. The Amish split and became Old Order or progressive. The progressives moved on to become Mennonite with but with the congregational mentality of the Amish. But moving into the 1900's, the progressive element in the Old Mennonite church helped push the Mennonite church to a breaking point with the Conservative Movement that started in the 50's and was strongest in the 60's and 70's then into the 80's....I realize that is a gross simplification of this history and probably not terribly accurate, my apologies....But, where I see this community is a little outside of this snapshot beginning with the ones who settled in the Hutchinson area. Their reasons for coming, the kind of climate they encountered when they got here, the late modernization of rural Kansas with electricity and phone service are all factors in how change was managed. I call it Amish because it was managed congregationally, and I call it Progressive because it didn't maintain the old order of Amish. The Conservative Mennonite Conference that Plainview is a part of is a Progressive Amish branch that started in 1910 as the Conservative Amish Mennonite Conference. Plainview formed out of the Amish in this area in 1948. I think it was only about ten years later in the late 50's that Center church was formed. I think the big sin of Plainview in this community at that time was not that it broke away from the Amish church, but that it broke from the congregational way of managing change in a community. I think this has put it slightly at odds with the rest of the community ever since. That's just my opinion, of course. :-)
By
Unknown, at 12/14/2014
Post a Comment
<< Home