Fragments, Freedom, and Fallout--Part 15
Truly Fragmented
This post will be very unsatisfying to readers who crave well-developed ideas, good coherence and smooth transitions from one idea to the next. Maybe something like that can happen again at some point, but right now all I feel able to manage is random observations. Some will apply to government and politics, and some will be more specific to Covid-19.
***************
If you're going to get infected by the Covid-19 virus, the asymptomatic kind seems far preferable to the symptomatic kind. I think it would be wonderful if someone could figure out why this affects people so differently. It's deadly to some, and unnoticeable to others. Obviously, if any specific conditions or practices predispose people to not develop symptoms, we'd all want to know what those conditions and practices are. Ditto for what makes the difference between people who have mild symptoms for a short duration versus those who become very ill and stay that way for a long time, and perhaps do not recover.
***************
People who develop symptoms of Covid-19 infection sometimes worsen markedly rather suddenly. Sometimes they do not recover, even if they are treated aggressively. It would be really nice if people sick at home could know when it's time to go to a hospital. Hiromi recently came across the idea that knowing one's blood oxygen saturation level can be a key piece of information in making this decision. Apparently, in Covid-19 patients the levels can drop to dangerous levels without much Being the git 'er done person that he is, he promptly bought a piece of medical equipment called a pulse oximeter. It was between 30 and 40 dollars at Walmart. If either of us gets sick we can stick a finger into that little electronic gadget and get a readout within seconds.
****************
Old people and people with other risk factors who hear repeatedly that Covid-19 isn't really dangerous for anyone except old people and those with other risk factors do not find this reminder of their vulnerability reassuring. Hearing it in the context of the necessity of "opening things up" sooner rather than later hints at a lack of care for the consequences for the vulnerable people among us. The same is true when people talk about isolating only the vulnerable, while the rest of the population goes about its normal activities. I recently saw a meme related to this. From memory: "Remember that the old people can hear you when you say that only old people are at risk." More evidence is emerging that people in other categories are at more significant risk than was thought at one time. It makes sense to me to be thoughtful about how we bandy about these pronouncements that may be shorter on facts and longer on being inconsiderate than is ideal.
*****************
Most of us do not need to know now whether Hydroxychloroquine or Remsdivir is a better pharmaceutical treatment option for Covid-19. If I become infected with this virus, I trust the Lord to make the best course of action clear at that time. In the meantime, I'm taking the same food supplements that I've been taking for a long time, and eating the same nutrient-rich foods that I've been eating regularly for breakfast. I added zinc and NAC to the regular food supplements.
*****************
I don't like wearing a mask because I really hate trapping hot breath next to my face and then breathing in hot air with the next breath. I still chose to wear a mask the other day when I traveled in my vehicle with several other ladies. When people are together in small enclosed enclosed spaces seems like one of the most necessary times to keep one's germs to oneself. Because Hiromi works as a cashier at Walmart, I appreciate those who wear masks when shopping there--for his sake and for the sake of others like him. On the other hand, I did not wear a mask on Sunday when I was sitting with others around a campfire. I even coughed once without covering my mouth. Shame on me.
*****************
I listened today (May 12) to the proceedings at a meeting of the president's Covid-19 task force, consisting of a bipartisan group of senators. The main feature of the meeting was to hear from representatives from each of four major federal entities most involved with Covid-19. Anthony Fauci, the director of the CDC, and the top official at the FDA were all present. The other person's last name was Giroir, and he spoke mostly about testing. The topic generally was on reopening the country. Each task force member also spoke briefly and had the opportunity to ask questions of any of the invited officials.
My impressions? Although there were a few barbs and a bit of self-interest in evidence, overall, the members of the group seemed reasonable and responsible, and they acted like leaders. The news outlets seem to have picked up mostly on Fauci's continued cautions about reopening too fast. He pointed out that unintended consequences of doing so could make the economic challenges worse, not to mention the health challenges--which is, of course, his main area of responsibility.
In one of the testier segments of the proceedings, Rand Paul told Fauci directly and publicly "I don't think you're the end all. . . ." [i.e. the supreme authority in this pandemic]. Fauci responded with grace. He began by agreeing with Paul that he was indeed not the "end all."
Because Fauci and others involved in this meeting are in isolation, some participated remotely, and it all seemed to be carried out with few glitches. The recording may still be available online somewhere.
******************
I participate occasionally in a Facebook group that is particularly geared toward people who are actively seeking to become part of a conservative Anabaptist church. When it was first formed, the organizer added me. I have never met this person and don't know most of the others who are part of the group. This week, someone posted a question there that is relevant to politics and government, and I found it and the responses really interesting. I will share part of that conversation here.
First I'll share my main contribution to the comment thread. Then I will share a number of excerpts from the thread. I have several other comments, but the main reason for sharing the thread is to provide context for mine, and to give you an opportunity to share in learning from others on the topics of politics and government.
In the excerpts I will not intentionally reveal the identity of those who participated, except for myself, of course. I will identify the various individuals only with a number. Also, you should perhaps know that they are not all residents or citizens of the US. I'm not sure how much difference the numbering, etc. will make, but I hope it helps make the conversation comprehensible. I hope I can wrangle all the text transfer challenges.
The original poster will be #1. I will insert a short row of asterisks between comments unless they were part of the same comment thread.
First, my main comment (repeated later in this blog post):
****
Note: Some of the formatting irregularities are my fault--or at least due to my ignorance (I think). I'll see if I can fix them later. Also, I didn't do any editing. (Internal quandry: Do I help people out and possibly save them some embarrassment or do I honor them more by letting their words stand as they formed and shared them?) I chose the latter option.
Original Post:
****
#5
[addressing #3] I agree , I did not mean we should be collaborators with Government, but respect it nevertheless. And we need to teach our people obey the law- pay taxes, not break immigration laws, because it's not fare to cut in line, when so many legal immigrants waiting in line for 10-15 years to get here in honest way, things like that.
***
#6
[addressing #1]
We need to be clear and completely differentiated from the world.... But we have to watch our attitude and demeanor in what we do. I find that real life accounts like Tortured for Christ and the Hiding Place and Bruchko help frame that approach very well in ways we can think about our own contexts.
Could it be that the devil created politics, just for that reason?
This post will be very unsatisfying to readers who crave well-developed ideas, good coherence and smooth transitions from one idea to the next. Maybe something like that can happen again at some point, but right now all I feel able to manage is random observations. Some will apply to government and politics, and some will be more specific to Covid-19.
***************
If you're going to get infected by the Covid-19 virus, the asymptomatic kind seems far preferable to the symptomatic kind. I think it would be wonderful if someone could figure out why this affects people so differently. It's deadly to some, and unnoticeable to others. Obviously, if any specific conditions or practices predispose people to not develop symptoms, we'd all want to know what those conditions and practices are. Ditto for what makes the difference between people who have mild symptoms for a short duration versus those who become very ill and stay that way for a long time, and perhaps do not recover.
***************
People who develop symptoms of Covid-19 infection sometimes worsen markedly rather suddenly. Sometimes they do not recover, even if they are treated aggressively. It would be really nice if people sick at home could know when it's time to go to a hospital. Hiromi recently came across the idea that knowing one's blood oxygen saturation level can be a key piece of information in making this decision. Apparently, in Covid-19 patients the levels can drop to dangerous levels without much Being the git 'er done person that he is, he promptly bought a piece of medical equipment called a pulse oximeter. It was between 30 and 40 dollars at Walmart. If either of us gets sick we can stick a finger into that little electronic gadget and get a readout within seconds.
****************
Old people and people with other risk factors who hear repeatedly that Covid-19 isn't really dangerous for anyone except old people and those with other risk factors do not find this reminder of their vulnerability reassuring. Hearing it in the context of the necessity of "opening things up" sooner rather than later hints at a lack of care for the consequences for the vulnerable people among us. The same is true when people talk about isolating only the vulnerable, while the rest of the population goes about its normal activities. I recently saw a meme related to this. From memory: "Remember that the old people can hear you when you say that only old people are at risk." More evidence is emerging that people in other categories are at more significant risk than was thought at one time. It makes sense to me to be thoughtful about how we bandy about these pronouncements that may be shorter on facts and longer on being inconsiderate than is ideal.
*****************
Most of us do not need to know now whether Hydroxychloroquine or Remsdivir is a better pharmaceutical treatment option for Covid-19. If I become infected with this virus, I trust the Lord to make the best course of action clear at that time. In the meantime, I'm taking the same food supplements that I've been taking for a long time, and eating the same nutrient-rich foods that I've been eating regularly for breakfast. I added zinc and NAC to the regular food supplements.
*****************
I don't like wearing a mask because I really hate trapping hot breath next to my face and then breathing in hot air with the next breath. I still chose to wear a mask the other day when I traveled in my vehicle with several other ladies. When people are together in small enclosed enclosed spaces seems like one of the most necessary times to keep one's germs to oneself. Because Hiromi works as a cashier at Walmart, I appreciate those who wear masks when shopping there--for his sake and for the sake of others like him. On the other hand, I did not wear a mask on Sunday when I was sitting with others around a campfire. I even coughed once without covering my mouth. Shame on me.
*****************
I listened today (May 12) to the proceedings at a meeting of the president's Covid-19 task force, consisting of a bipartisan group of senators. The main feature of the meeting was to hear from representatives from each of four major federal entities most involved with Covid-19. Anthony Fauci, the director of the CDC, and the top official at the FDA were all present. The other person's last name was Giroir, and he spoke mostly about testing. The topic generally was on reopening the country. Each task force member also spoke briefly and had the opportunity to ask questions of any of the invited officials.
My impressions? Although there were a few barbs and a bit of self-interest in evidence, overall, the members of the group seemed reasonable and responsible, and they acted like leaders. The news outlets seem to have picked up mostly on Fauci's continued cautions about reopening too fast. He pointed out that unintended consequences of doing so could make the economic challenges worse, not to mention the health challenges--which is, of course, his main area of responsibility.
In one of the testier segments of the proceedings, Rand Paul told Fauci directly and publicly "I don't think you're the end all. . . ." [i.e. the supreme authority in this pandemic]. Fauci responded with grace. He began by agreeing with Paul that he was indeed not the "end all."
Because Fauci and others involved in this meeting are in isolation, some participated remotely, and it all seemed to be carried out with few glitches. The recording may still be available online somewhere.
******************
I participate occasionally in a Facebook group that is particularly geared toward people who are actively seeking to become part of a conservative Anabaptist church. When it was first formed, the organizer added me. I have never met this person and don't know most of the others who are part of the group. This week, someone posted a question there that is relevant to politics and government, and I found it and the responses really interesting. I will share part of that conversation here.
First I'll share my main contribution to the comment thread. Then I will share a number of excerpts from the thread. I have several other comments, but the main reason for sharing the thread is to provide context for mine, and to give you an opportunity to share in learning from others on the topics of politics and government.
In the excerpts I will not intentionally reveal the identity of those who participated, except for myself, of course. I will identify the various individuals only with a number. Also, you should perhaps know that they are not all residents or citizens of the US. I'm not sure how much difference the numbering, etc. will make, but I hope it helps make the conversation comprehensible. I hope I can wrangle all the text transfer challenges.
The original poster will be #1. I will insert a short row of asterisks between comments unless they were part of the same comment thread.
First, my main comment (repeated later in this blog post):
My father was a
Beachy minister and very involved in many ministries both inside and outside of
this group. From him I learned that "being a witness" is one of our
important duties--to all, of course, but to government also. In keeping with
this, he was involved at times in gathering signatures for a petition, he
joined others in a meeting with legislators in our state capitol, and he once
met with the governor, as part of group of Anabaptists. I believe that for my
dad, being a witness meant being involved in public life, always representing
Christ as he carried out such involvements.
I will say that I identify with the struggle that others have referred to here, in trying to live faithfully in relation to politics and government. I have never voted (neither did my father), and I've come to feel that observing this level of separation from politics and government is actually quite helpful in trying to sort through what relationship to government/politics should look like.
One of the bottom-line reasons I see for not being involved in politics/government is that we cannot be part of anything that employs force to bring about change--even good change. While I realize that voting can be defended as a non-forceful way to bring about change, I believe another issue comes into play when we do that.
When we vote on a candidate for office, we are always voting for an imperfect individual about whom we actually know very little (except perhaps in small local elections). In most cases, we vote for someone who identifies with a political party--which involves voting for someone who embraces an even more extensive mix of good and evil. When I consider all this, partisan politics looks very distasteful to me, as does embracing or promoting any candidate for office.
After all the voting is done and we know who has been elected, our duties toward government become more clear. We can accept that outcomes did not occur beyond the watchful eye of a sovereign God. Any ongoing developments can be regarded similarly.
Being a witness, as I believe I am called to be, in a highly politicized environment involving many Christian Anabaptist friends has prompted a lot of soul searching for me. I certainly don't believe that we are all called to exactly the same actions and roles, but I believe that among us are some who are called to speak prophetically to a needy world. Sometimes this may mean naming what we see in public figures--things that should be of interest to other Christians especially. These will likely be character or moral issues, more than policy issues.
I would be very happy to hear more from others who have wrestled with these things and come to some place of peace. I truly believe there is a narrow space where Anabaptists can be helpfully present in a politicized world without compromising their allegiance to God's kingdom. I'm not sure that I've found it, but that's what I seek.
I will say that I identify with the struggle that others have referred to here, in trying to live faithfully in relation to politics and government. I have never voted (neither did my father), and I've come to feel that observing this level of separation from politics and government is actually quite helpful in trying to sort through what relationship to government/politics should look like.
One of the bottom-line reasons I see for not being involved in politics/government is that we cannot be part of anything that employs force to bring about change--even good change. While I realize that voting can be defended as a non-forceful way to bring about change, I believe another issue comes into play when we do that.
When we vote on a candidate for office, we are always voting for an imperfect individual about whom we actually know very little (except perhaps in small local elections). In most cases, we vote for someone who identifies with a political party--which involves voting for someone who embraces an even more extensive mix of good and evil. When I consider all this, partisan politics looks very distasteful to me, as does embracing or promoting any candidate for office.
After all the voting is done and we know who has been elected, our duties toward government become more clear. We can accept that outcomes did not occur beyond the watchful eye of a sovereign God. Any ongoing developments can be regarded similarly.
Being a witness, as I believe I am called to be, in a highly politicized environment involving many Christian Anabaptist friends has prompted a lot of soul searching for me. I certainly don't believe that we are all called to exactly the same actions and roles, but I believe that among us are some who are called to speak prophetically to a needy world. Sometimes this may mean naming what we see in public figures--things that should be of interest to other Christians especially. These will likely be character or moral issues, more than policy issues.
I would be very happy to hear more from others who have wrestled with these things and come to some place of peace. I truly believe there is a narrow space where Anabaptists can be helpfully present in a politicized world without compromising their allegiance to God's kingdom. I'm not sure that I've found it, but that's what I seek.
****
Note: Some of the formatting irregularities are my fault--or at least due to my ignorance (I think). I'll see if I can fix them later. Also, I didn't do any editing. (Internal quandry: Do I help people out and possibly save them some embarrassment or do I honor them more by letting their words stand as they formed and shared them?) I chose the latter option.
Original Post:
I have a quesion
and PLEASE let us not get into a political discussion. But here goes. Many know
I come from a family of different anabaptist (neu taufer) backgrounds. I have
spent quiet a lot of my life in a Mennonite Church that is fully vested in a
very liberal conference. It is what brings me here. Trying to find a balance
between needing to just submit to life on a Hutterite Colony while no longer
being able to continue with the congregation of Mennonites I have been
accustomed to.
My struggle is this: Politics. Am
I the only one here raised away from politics? I was raised to disregard
politics, we don’t support military and other aggressive actions. But so many
people are so engaged in politics. I would gently say they are talking more
politics than about the scriptures.
I mean no harm.
I mean not to call out anothers sins. Just trying to make sense of this. I
suppose due to this plague going about.
****
#2
on a personal
note I have much the same problem but on the opposite side of things, I
actually have a masters in political theory and throughout my life have been
very interested and involved in politics.. it has been the major struggle for
me with falling in love with more anabaptist theology. Lord help me!
****
#3
I’m like [#2] have gone from heavily involved in politics to one who has gotten bored of it
all as realise how ephemeral and shallow current worldly politics is.
Unfortunately, given it has consumed a lot of Protestantism I’ve seen the horrible effect it has on public life if we mix church and state.
This is why as far as Anabaptism goes I feel it is better to keep away from politics.
Unfortunately, given it has consumed a lot of Protestantism I’ve seen the horrible effect it has on public life if we mix church and state.
This is why as far as Anabaptism goes I feel it is better to keep away from politics.
****
#4
I wasn't raised
this way, but it is a practice I embrace. I don't see any sense in being
invested in a system I'm not part of. Sure, discussion here and there, staying
informed... But staying out of it otherwise, and not cultivating an opinion, is
good practice.
***
#5 Note: #5 grew up in the former Soviet Union
Nothing wrong
discussing it from time to time. Otherwise why conceal it if it is on our mind
anyway?. It's also good to know what's going on in case we urgently need to run
to the other country for safety of our families. I am not supporting fighting
but rather running for safer place if I need to.
Also Bible in new testament urges us to
consider Government as establishment of God in order to contain evil from
breaking into a chaos. Any despising or mocking high powers, which are
establshed by God, should be exposed and reprimanded. We are to respect Government, laws,
obedience to higher authorities. Teaching children always respectfully address
our powers of the country. If the Government asks us to abdicate morality or
our Saviour's commandments, we have to disobey and if needed, to flee. We also called
to pray for Government fervently!
****
#3
[addressing #5] whilst I agree
with the sentiment, I don’t think Jesus’s followers went around condemning the
Jewish independence movement. History shows they got help from the independence
movement to escape the authorities on multiple occasions. They didn’t agree
with the rebels use of violence but also didn’t oppose them and occasionally
worked with them when their safety called for it.
we often see
throughout history Anabaptists wanting to be good model citizens but are forced
to be harboured by rebels and out of this comes a certain level of respect
between fugitives. Thus there are oftentimes where the relationship between
Anabaptists and authorities is deeply at odds.
****
#5
[addressing #3] I agree , I did not mean we should be collaborators with Government, but respect it nevertheless. And we need to teach our people obey the law- pay taxes, not break immigration laws, because it's not fare to cut in line, when so many legal immigrants waiting in line for 10-15 years to get here in honest way, things like that.
***
#6
[addressing #1]
I come from a
religious conservative, Evangelical background. And they are totally “in bed”
with the politics of the kingdoms of men. They also deny the kingdom of God as
substantive now, which is the beginning of why I repented of such.
The two kingdoms understanding of Anabaptists is the understanding of the NT and it authors. And to this end, we have our kingdom and the world has it’s kingdoms, which form the kingdom of darkness. It’s leaders, wherever we find ourselves, are just that, their leaders. As ambassadors of our kingdom in their kingdoms we are to respect them, give honor to who honor is due. But, we have our own mandates, objectives, and purposes; which can sometimes (many times perhaps) be at odds with the kingdoms of men. Daniel in the Old Testament is an example, so are the Hebrew midwives. So too, Peter and John. And as [#5] mentioned, we are to teach our children to respect those authorities and pray for them. But, we aren’t to cower, or capitulate, or join them in identity or belonging.
Those who are concerned about or involve themselves with the politics of men, except for the direct ordering of God, are on a slippery slope if they haven’t already abdicated to the kingdoms of men.
To consider any matter as the world sees them is to confirm the trajectory and direction of the world as it is. That which calls itself church in its political activity has done zilch for God by having done so, but they have facilitated the world and it’s war against God.
I have written extensively about this very subject for near 20 years.
The two kingdoms understanding of Anabaptists is the understanding of the NT and it authors. And to this end, we have our kingdom and the world has it’s kingdoms, which form the kingdom of darkness. It’s leaders, wherever we find ourselves, are just that, their leaders. As ambassadors of our kingdom in their kingdoms we are to respect them, give honor to who honor is due. But, we have our own mandates, objectives, and purposes; which can sometimes (many times perhaps) be at odds with the kingdoms of men. Daniel in the Old Testament is an example, so are the Hebrew midwives. So too, Peter and John. And as [#5] mentioned, we are to teach our children to respect those authorities and pray for them. But, we aren’t to cower, or capitulate, or join them in identity or belonging.
Those who are concerned about or involve themselves with the politics of men, except for the direct ordering of God, are on a slippery slope if they haven’t already abdicated to the kingdoms of men.
To consider any matter as the world sees them is to confirm the trajectory and direction of the world as it is. That which calls itself church in its political activity has done zilch for God by having done so, but they have facilitated the world and it’s war against God.
I have written extensively about this very subject for near 20 years.
****
#5
[addressing #6]
while Christ teaching us
being as separated, the Kings are put there by God for blessing or punishment
of the worldly people. This is not Satan's doing. We just have to pray for
Government so it does makes good decisions. Believe it or not God cares about
people. Paul explained this things in Romans, not sure the chapter.
We are Ambassadors here
though, and can not participate in worldly Government, but pray for them as for
God's servants, so we can have peaceful life and practice our faith openly.
****
[responding to #6]I
especially like this sentiment and wording: "we aren’t to cower, or
capitulate, or join them in identity or belonging."
****
#6
[responding to me] Miriam Iwashige,
Yes! I think some times in Anabaptist or “peaceable beliefs” we can be lulled
into thinking resistance is antithetical to being peaceable. But we can and should
be resistant and always differentiating between us and the world because of the
conspiracy of their ways and how kowtowing to them only facilitates them.
We need to be clear and completely differentiated from the world.... But we have to watch our attitude and demeanor in what we do. I find that real life accounts like Tortured for Christ and the Hiding Place and Bruchko help frame that approach very well in ways we can think about our own contexts.
***
#5
Yes it is
wonderful. Can you tell me what type of Mennonite Lederach [apparently the author of the book The Third Way, which #5 had recommended to #6] was? He died a
number of years ago and I did not ask his son...
I had thought of republishing his book because it is sooooo good, but I understand it remains copyrighted with some Anabaptist company. I am still thinking of republishing is as a commentary of a Protestant who left that association because of various thing, but most assuredly through reading this book. I want to add a lot of content is a side column to draw the reader’s attention to why various things are important because they are missing in Protestantism.
I had thought of republishing his book because it is sooooo good, but I understand it remains copyrighted with some Anabaptist company. I am still thinking of republishing is as a commentary of a Protestant who left that association because of various thing, but most assuredly through reading this book. I want to add a lot of content is a side column to draw the reader’s attention to why various things are important because they are missing in Protestantism.
*****
#6
[directed to #5] Please keep me updated...
In my experience, I put this book [The Third Way by Lederach] in my top 10 books EVERY believer ought to
read. It’s simple but deep in all the right places.
****
#7 (This person is currently part of a Beachy church)
It's one area [politics] you'll note that I stay out of on this page. In addition to my medical
background I was a peace activist and writer (and FGC Quaker) for many years.
It is the hardest thing for me to let go of-- I still find myself immediately,
intensely disagreeing with some things I see here occasionally but I have
to realise I can't progress on my path as long as I'm holding on to all of that
world.
Additionally I don't want to influence someone one way or the other on political things as that is not the purpose of this page.
Additionally I don't want to influence someone one way or the other on political things as that is not the purpose of this page.
[in response to #5] Yes before coming to
Anabaptism I was Quaker plus my seminary time was in a Scottish Episcopalian
school in Edinburgh.
Now you know why I'm as weird as I am
Now you know why I'm as weird as I am
****
#2
I wonder too
what we mean when we say anabaptist cant get involved in politics.. of course
being part of government or whatever else is out of the question.. but where do
you join the line between what is politics and what is not? in a lot of ways
intentional anabaptist living is a poltical posture, so is standing for
non-violence etc is there space in which thetwo kingdoms overlap? is helping at
a food bank - feeding, clothing or finding shelter for the homeless too
political? I think people think of politicals in a very narrow way and it gives
pause for thought
[in response to a comment identifying Menno Simons with good works, as referenced in the song "True Evangelical Faith."] For sure, I am
just saying that it is important to think about what politics is.. especially
in democracies.. politics doesn’t just happen in the halls of government
buildings ☺️
****
o
Miriam Iwashige [in response to #2]it's my understanding that
Christians must involve themselves in many activities that others have
politicized. Thus the overlap is inevitable, and it seems to me that paying as
little mind as possible to political labels others may wish to attach to us is
needful. Certainly we should not do anything as a follower of Christ that is
first and foremost an expression of loyalty to a political party or its
candidates or positions.
*****
# #7
I think it's
pretty completely separate[#2].
Of course folks do feeding, clothing, and sheltering and with organisations
which do so but when it becomes part of a larger thing such as, say, protesting
a governmental action which I perceive as treating poor people unfairly then
I've crossed into the worldly/political side.
Most folks here for example know that I work for a small, secular, Montréal-based foundation for Haiti. I find it FAR more effective than anything church-based I've seen. BUT we stay entirely out of politics or anything of that nature in our work.
And with that I'd better back out as I'll start getting caught up in this!!
Most folks here for example know that I work for a small, secular, Montréal-based foundation for Haiti. I find it FAR more effective than anything church-based I've seen. BUT we stay entirely out of politics or anything of that nature in our work.
And with that I'd better back out as I'll start getting caught up in this!!
****
#8
I try to be
salt and light to the world. Salt has to be in contact with the object it is
supposed to he helping in order to do any good.
I pay attention to politics similarly as I do sports.
Watch a few highlights, don't really spend much time being involved in it, since it doesn't really gain much for me.
It is a bridge to make a relationship with strangers.
Oddly, In my business, I deal with Conservative Anabaptists and those who are mainstream denominations. The Conservative Anabaptists seem to be more knowledgeable about politics than the non-conservative.
I find it humorous because the "plain" people don't vote, but the "not plain" people do vote but don't talk about it as much.
In summary, if it is something you struggle with, avoid it.
If you can view it in moderation; wonderful.
Defining what you mean by being involved in politics may be good to make sure we aren't assuming different degrees of involvement.
I pay attention to politics similarly as I do sports.
Watch a few highlights, don't really spend much time being involved in it, since it doesn't really gain much for me.
It is a bridge to make a relationship with strangers.
Oddly, In my business, I deal with Conservative Anabaptists and those who are mainstream denominations. The Conservative Anabaptists seem to be more knowledgeable about politics than the non-conservative.
I find it humorous because the "plain" people don't vote, but the "not plain" people do vote but don't talk about it as much.
In summary, if it is something you struggle with, avoid it.
If you can view it in moderation; wonderful.
Defining what you mean by being involved in politics may be good to make sure we aren't assuming different degrees of involvement.
****
[to #8] I
wonder if politically active Anabaptists have somehow conflated Christianity
and conservatism. In my experience, consciously avoiding this conflation often
gets me labeled as a liberal--something I have no more desire to be identified
with than political conservatism. I see a real need to view all things
political through the lens of Scripture. When we do that, we see things in all
parties that are laudable, and some things that are despicable. Being able to
acknowledge that without making a final decision on which is right (correct)
seems like a good place to occupy.
****
#9
I hear and feel where you
are comeing from Schon D. Maher . Or at least I think I do. I was also raised
away from politics and political discussions. It seems as the years go by
politics are being talked about more and more. More on the level of, did you see
what just happened and what there planning to do. I will say this, I do not go
out of my way to.read the news on whats happening in the political world. But
what I do see and hear tends to push me to Gods Word. We are given the signs
and times for a reason. And there political things thats talked about in the
book Revelation. Its there so we know what to expect. I in all honesty do not
care for politics. I figure if you dont vote why talk about it. The best thing
we can do is pray for those in office and pray that Gods will would be done on
earth as it is in Heaven. I will also add I have never voted and do not plan to
start.
I to do not support the
military and acts of violence in any way shape or form. Some may say this is
supporting them. And if it truly is I would like to know. The only thing I do
for the military is pray for them. I do ask for there safty. (Some may say this
is supporting them) But the main thing I pray for is that those in the military
would be saved. I pray that God would open there eyes and soften their hearts
to bring about repentance so they will be born again.
****
[to #9] the
part of your post that triggered a response from me is this: "I figure if
you don't vote why talk about it." In my comment [which appeared later in the thread for some reason], I identify one reason
why we might want to talk about it. Your position resonates with me, however,
and I respect it.
****
#9
[directed at me apparently] I have gone
through and read some of your posts and feel I understand where you are comeing
from. Maybe I should have been more clear with that statement. My Family would
have known what I meant by it. Since yall do not know me maybe I should
explain myself better. That comment stems from being around folks that
done vote. But like to give there opinions on political matter freely, even
telling other who vote how they should vote. Hence the statement. If you dont
vote why talk about it? My dad likes to read about whats going on in the world
of politics. Then he share what he reads. Most times we end up back at the
bible.
*****
#10
I will just add... Not
being raised Mennonite, but rather raised in a Protestant denomination with
somewhat patriotic leanings, I have been quite surprised on occasion by the
political comments of some conservative Mennonite men. So much so, in fact,
that I have told my wife on occasion - Its a good thing that Mennonites don't
vote :) .
I guess what surprises me
most is, why even discuss something we are not a part of? And why would we even
dream of influencing someone's vote if we ourselves don't?
****
#11
[addressed to#10] to
your next to last question, and I offer it as observation rather than
justification, the tendency to discuss it is because often (not always) the
results of the politics have an effect upon our lives or functions in society.
****
[addressed to #10] "It's
a good thing Mennonites don't vote." In recent years this has changed
dramatically in some conservative Anabaptist circles, I believe. Many of these
people do indeed vote, and voices against doing so are increasingly becoming
lone voices.
****
This was the comment I wrote first--actually before many of the above comments (and some of my responses) appeared.
My father was a
Beachy minister and very involved in many ministries both inside and outside of
this group. From him I learned that "being a witness" is one of our
important duties--to all, of course, but to government also. In keeping with
this, he was involved at times in gathering signatures for a petition, he
joined others in a meeting with legislators in our state capitol, and he once
met with the governor, as part of group of Anabaptists. I believe that for my
dad, being a witness meant being involved in public life, always representing
Christ as he carried out such involvements.
I will say that I identify with the struggle that others have referred to here, in trying to live faithfully in relation to politics and government. I have never voted (neither did my father), and I've come to feel that observing this level of separation from politics and government is actually quite helpful in trying to sort through what relationship to government/politics should look like.
One of the bottom-line reasons I see for not being involved in politics/government is that we cannot be part of anything that employs force to bring about change--even good change. While I realize that voting can be defended as a non-forceful way to bring about change, I believe another issue comes into play when we do that.
When we vote on a candidate for office, we are always voting for an imperfect individual about whom we actually know very little (except perhaps in small local elections). In most cases, we vote for someone who identifies with a political party--which involves voting for someone who embraces an even more extensive mix of good and evil. When I consider all this, partisan politics looks very distasteful to me, as does embracing or promoting any candidate for office.
After all the voting is done and we know who has been elected, our duties toward government become more clear. We can accept that outcomes did not occur beyond the watchful eye of a sovereign God. Any ongoing developments can be regarded similarly.
Being a witness, as I believe I am called to be, in a highly politicized environment involving many Christian Anabaptist friends has prompted a lot of soul searching for me. I certainly don't believe that we are all called to exactly the same actions and roles, but I believe that among us are some who are called to speak prophetically to a needy world. Sometimes this may mean naming what we see in public figures--things that should be of interest to other Christians especially. These will likely be character or moral issues, more than policy issues.
I would be very happy to hear more from others who have wrestled with these things and come to some place of peace. I truly believe there is a narrow space where Anabaptists can be helpfully present in a politicized world without compromising their allegiance to God's kingdom. I'm not sure that I've found it, but that's what I seek.
I will say that I identify with the struggle that others have referred to here, in trying to live faithfully in relation to politics and government. I have never voted (neither did my father), and I've come to feel that observing this level of separation from politics and government is actually quite helpful in trying to sort through what relationship to government/politics should look like.
One of the bottom-line reasons I see for not being involved in politics/government is that we cannot be part of anything that employs force to bring about change--even good change. While I realize that voting can be defended as a non-forceful way to bring about change, I believe another issue comes into play when we do that.
When we vote on a candidate for office, we are always voting for an imperfect individual about whom we actually know very little (except perhaps in small local elections). In most cases, we vote for someone who identifies with a political party--which involves voting for someone who embraces an even more extensive mix of good and evil. When I consider all this, partisan politics looks very distasteful to me, as does embracing or promoting any candidate for office.
After all the voting is done and we know who has been elected, our duties toward government become more clear. We can accept that outcomes did not occur beyond the watchful eye of a sovereign God. Any ongoing developments can be regarded similarly.
Being a witness, as I believe I am called to be, in a highly politicized environment involving many Christian Anabaptist friends has prompted a lot of soul searching for me. I certainly don't believe that we are all called to exactly the same actions and roles, but I believe that among us are some who are called to speak prophetically to a needy world. Sometimes this may mean naming what we see in public figures--things that should be of interest to other Christians especially. These will likely be character or moral issues, more than policy issues.
I would be very happy to hear more from others who have wrestled with these things and come to some place of peace. I truly believe there is a narrow space where Anabaptists can be helpfully present in a politicized world without compromising their allegiance to God's kingdom. I'm not sure that I've found it, but that's what I seek.
****
#5
Miriam Iwashige this
is a great comment. Like for example if they start closing homeschooling I
would like to sign the petition to not let them. Or when they want enforce
sexual education for children or drag queen for libraries, I so want to help
not let it pass. I will have to think about what you said, this is very
insightful. Thank you!
[to #5]
Several of my dad's "political" activities
involved appeals for freedoms related to education in Christian families. I'd
like to think that simply making a respectful appeal is usually in order if we
see pending decisions that are troubling, especially if we can look out for
others' benefit by speaking up. Some regulatory issues belong in this category,
I believe.
****
#1
Wow. What
wonderful and enlightening reaponses. Probably I won’t have the mindfulness to
respond to every comment. But truly what a blessing to receive all this
information.
I guess including some of my background was essential to me while I am still relatively young, so to speak, I have always been taught in any anabaptist church growing up, that we have little to no desire to follow or partake in politics.
But a vast majority of my friends belong to more liberal (or as I might have said “worldly” Mennonite conferences). They seem very invested in politics. For the life of me it is so hard to figure out because it seems as though many anabaptist principles overlap. One side is very cautious to go to war, encourages love and tolerance of all people, but on the same hand promotes abortion, and many diverse unhealthy relationships. The other party seems mostly against abortion, unhealthy relationships, and claims to support “Christians,” but seems to support war and standing army in many places.
I have always tried to turn to the scriptures for answers and really found that neither political party would really stand up to scripture.
I guess including some of my background was essential to me while I am still relatively young, so to speak, I have always been taught in any anabaptist church growing up, that we have little to no desire to follow or partake in politics.
But a vast majority of my friends belong to more liberal (or as I might have said “worldly” Mennonite conferences). They seem very invested in politics. For the life of me it is so hard to figure out because it seems as though many anabaptist principles overlap. One side is very cautious to go to war, encourages love and tolerance of all people, but on the same hand promotes abortion, and many diverse unhealthy relationships. The other party seems mostly against abortion, unhealthy relationships, and claims to support “Christians,” but seems to support war and standing army in many places.
I have always tried to turn to the scriptures for answers and really found that neither political party would really stand up to scripture.
" [in response to #1] "I have always tried to turn to the scriptures for answers and really found that neither political party would really stand up to scripture." Exactly. Thanks for articulating this. I can't figure out why there seems to be so little agreement on this.
[#1's response to me] Yes. It seems
that politics even what starts as a healthy discussion turns contentious and
angry so fast.
Could it be that the devil created politics, just for that reason?
****
#3
[in response to #1]
I think the
main issues are that Christianity is neither left nor right wing but has
elements from both. For instance helping the poor is typically left wing in
secular politics but being against abortion is right wing. Being against
slavery is left wing, being for family is right wing. Being communal minded is
left wing, being against remarriages is seen as right wing. You see
Christianity is both wings at once. It was designed to reach the broadest
spectrum of humanity and be appealing to all people. When we think about it, it
actually transcends politics of the world. But humans place their own value
systems upon it. So social gospel Christians see it and show that Christianity
supports social justice. Southern Baptist’s often find passages in the bible that
supports war mongering. Each of these groups bring their own values and attach
it to Christianity.
****
#9
[addressed to #1] could
be. It is the human nature to act that way though. I feel the reason it can
turn that way is to many times we arw self seeking. That truly is where
contention comes from, self seeking.
What about politics in the church? Some things turn political real fast. I am not talking about churches talking politics of the world. But politics inside the church. A church we used to go to was not fit doring meatings about what and how to do things and who was in charge. No need to go farther, other then to say it was saddening.
What about politics in the church? Some things turn political real fast. I am not talking about churches talking politics of the world. But politics inside the church. A church we used to go to was not fit doring meatings about what and how to do things and who was in charge. No need to go farther, other then to say it was saddening.
o
posted by Miriam Iwashige at
9:40 AM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home