Mennonites and the election

[Solly]

Sourced from Ekkleisa Project
Some thoughts from a US Mennonite on the morning after the presidential election:

1. I am grateful to the good folks of my native state of Pennsylvania for voting for a change in presidential leadership. Wise people.

2. I am ashamed of the way many “evangelical Christians” have positioned themselves in this election. The gunslinging chauvinism and military adventurism of the current administration, with its favoring of rich over poor and its disregard of God’s creation, reflect nothing of the Good News of Jesus Christ. Our nation will stand under the judgment of history and the judgment of God for arrogance and injustice. I probably will take at least a one-week moratorium on calling myself an evangelical. Come to think of it, perhaps I’ll take a similar moratorium on calling myself a Christian, since most of the world wakes up today thinking that “Christian” America has endorsed the imperial policies of this president. Then, after a week of grieving that the gospel gets associated with such abuse of power (and grieving that the Catholic candidate for president seemed so eager to show that he can carry a gun too), I will do penance and resume being an evangelical Christian. I will take comfort in the solidarity I find among fellow Christians/evangelicals in, say, the “Confessing Christ in a World of Violence” statement and similar movements of conscience.

3. I also will reaffirm my conviction that hope for humanity and the restoration of creation lies with the Reign of God, not with any political party or candidate or nation. Although the church sometimes disappoints me, I have more routinely been disappointed by political processes. The entire tenor of the present presidential race has been discouraging, and neither candidate would have taken us two steps closer to the Sermon on the Mount. God bless the people who have to be politicians, and those who hold office in this country. I will pray for President Bush and others in leadership in this country, but I am more certain than ever that my citizenship is somewhere else.

Nelson Kraybill, president of Associated Mennonite Biblical Seminary in Indiana.

This is something of what I was looking for, as far as a Mennonite position is concerned. I find myself increasingly moving towards this nonLiberal/nonConservative position.

November 3, 2004

[OneFollowingHim]

I find my self agreeing with much of what is said here. I do have a comment though. Christians can definitely be zealots. (I think he calls them militant gunslingers.) But that does not mean they are wrong.

It's interesting when you look at Pennsylvania countly by county, It looks a lot like he country in terms of conservative majority controlling the largest land area. CNN has a great web page (http://www.cnn.com/ELECTION/2004/pages/results/states/PA/P/00/index.html) showing this.

Philly, Pittsburgh and Erie clearly favoring the liberal democrat and just about everywhere else Bush has the majority or it's evenly split. Without Philly, Bush wins Pennsylvania hands down. Heck, a full 81% of Philadelphians voted for Kerry. That's a lot of votes! I have an over-simplified theory about this.

People who migrate to dense population areas have a socialistic tendency which which correlates better with liberalism. I know it's not entirely true for everyone in all cases, but when you look at the majority, it seems to fit.

[Amazing Rando]

Sourced from Ekkleisa Project


This is something of what I was looking for, as far as a Mennonite position is concerned. I find myself increasingly moving towards this nonLiberal/nonConservative position.

November 3, 2004

You bet Solly! I'm at the other Mennonite seminary right now, Eastern Mennonite Seminary (http://www.emu.edu/seminary), and one of my professors posted this email on the opinion board.

I'd say that perhaps 2/3 of the folks at my seminary voted for Kerry with the other third going to Bush. Those who voted for Kerry did so with deep misgivings though about things like abortion, among other issues. The modern Anabaptists, as I'm coming to find out, really have inherited the "Radical Reformation" from their 16th Century roots.

[dizzle]

Our nation will stand under the judgment of history and the judgment of God for arrogance and injustice.

Oh boy, where are the outcries! If a "conservative" Christian had talked about how we will be under the judgment of God and history for killing our children in the womb and wanting to normalize unnatural sexual deviancy there would be ahhhhh ohhh that scarey scarey thoughts of the evil theonomists.

Phooey.

I think that man has every right to say that - but then so do others without the demonization that goes along with it - but then again, I guess it is okay to talk about the judgment of God as long as we are cuddly with the rest of the message right? and defame the right people -those gun-toting zealots! Whooo hooo!

Yeah a lot of that is tongue in cheek but like most sarcasm it reflects a very real root in how I see things going and is not meant to be critical of the author of the article, but some of the doublestandardness I see in postings here (on the forum not this thread per se), and that judgment of God statement just set me off, cuase I know what would happen if a conservative article was posted that contained that line. The fur would be flying.

Read again, YES A LOT OF WHAT I POSTED was deliberate exaggeration, but there is a real kernel there.

[Solly]

Wasn't it the evangelicals who declared AIDS a judgment of God on homosexuals?

[Amazing Rando]

Wasn't it the evangelicals who declared AIDS a judgment of God on homosexuals?

Depends on what you mean by "evangelicals," Solly. All the Mennonites I know would consider themselves evangelicals.

[dizzle]

The relevance to my statement? None.

My statement was that one group is given pretty wide berth to invoke the judgment of God and not a peep is said, yet when the other does it automatically is mocked. I am not trying to or interested in defending anyone particular statement, nor am I denying or interested in denying the above author's statement - I am much more general about the double-standard - the "passivists" and those with the more cuddly message are given freedom to talk about the judmgnet of God but the conservatives are not. Sorry Solly but I see your above statement as a flaming strawman that is seeking to find a sensationalistic example to paint all. I have zero interest in discussing AIDS or specific examples, but the general principle of mockery of one group and not the other. They both can be dead wrong in specific examples.

My point was about the general proprietary of mentioning the judgment of God. I have no issue with the gentleman above saying that. If that is his beliefs, then he is consistent in believing that. However, the converse is true.

[Amazing Rando]

"passivists"

That's pacifists, thank you, not "passivists." Big difference. :poke:

[dizzle]

Did I say a bad word?

[Amazing Rando]

Did I say a bad word?

:lol: Just a common misconception. Christian "Pacifists" are opposed to the use of violence in resisting evil (think Martin Luther King, for example)- they're not opposed to resisting evil, as the word "passivist" is frequently used to imply. :smile:

[Solly]

The relevance to my statement? None.

My statement was that one group is given pretty wide berth to invoke the judgment of God and not a peep is said, yet when the other does it automatically is mocked. I am not trying to or interested in defending anyone particular statement, nor am I denying or interested in denying the above author's statement - I am much more general about the double-standard - the "passivists" and those with the more cuddly message are given freedom to talk about the judmgnet of God but the conservatives are not. Sorry Solly but I see your above statement as a flaming strawman that is seeking to find a sensationalistic example to paint all. I have zero interest in discussing AIDS or specific examples, but the general principle of mockery of one group and not the other. They both can be dead wrong in specific examples.

My point was about the general proprietary of mentioning the judgment of God. I have no issue with the gentleman above saying that. If that is his beliefs, then he is consistent in believing that. However, the converse is true.

Nice dodge DD; however, it is very relevant. Evangelicals are very quick to talk about the judgment of God falling for one reason or another. I have also remembered British and American Christians who speak about God's judgment falling upon our nations for not supporting Israel enough. Judgment talk is quite easy. You will notice, however, that Kraybill pin points general attitudes and issues - arrogance and injustice - rather than pointing the finger at specific policies, and to that I think any American Christian would say yes, if they also wish to invoke the prayer God bless America.
Evangelicals, OTOH, pinpointed a specific community as having been judged by God, and often turned to Romans 1 to support such a claim. Liberals are castigated as Godless, even though they might be Chrisitans - just not Christians of the right sort of course.
Could you also point out the general mockery you refer to? Do you mean mention of 'cuddly message'??

[dizzle]

Nice dodge DD; however, it is very relevant. Evangelicals are very quick to talk about the judgment of God falling for one reason or another. I have also remembered British and American Christians who speak about God's judgment falling upon our nations for not supporting Israel enough. Judgment talk is quite easy. You will notice, however, that Kraybill pin points general attitudes and issues - arrogance and injustice - rather than pointing the finger at specific policies, and to that I think any American Christian would say yes, if they also wish to invoke the prayer God bless America.

You failed to address my point. I agree with you that it is very easy and quick to invoke the judgment of God. My point is that there is a knee-jerk reaction against one group when it does it but not a word when another does it from the same people who condemn the one.



Evangelicals, OTOH, pinpointed a specific community as having been judged by God, and often turned to Romans 1 to support such a claim. Liberals are castigated as Godless, even though they might be Chrisitans - just not Christians of the right sort of course.
Could you also point out the general mockery you refer to? Do you mean mention of 'cuddly message'??

Yes I was being intentionally biting with my terminology to prove a point. And that is that is not prima facie wrong to bring up the judgment of God - and the arguments against when a conservative does it should be on the Biblical merits and not the emotional knee jerk.

[Pilgrim]

Sourced from Ekkleisa Project


This is something of what I was looking for, as far as a Mennonite position is concerned. I find myself increasingly moving towards this nonLiberal/nonConservative position.

November 3, 2004
Dr. Kraybill was a former prof. of mine when I attended Elizabethtown College which is affiliated with The Bretheren in Christ church.

[Pilgrim]

I find my self agreeing with much of what is said here. I do have a comment though. Christians can definitely be zealots. (I think he calls them militant gunslingers.) But that does not mean they are wrong.

It's interesting when you look at Pennsylvania countly by county, It looks a lot like he country in terms of conservative majority controlling the largest land area. CNN has a great web page (http://www.cnn.com/ELECTION/2004/pages/results/states/PA/P/00/index.html) showing this.

Philly, Pittsburgh and Erie clearly favoring the liberal democrat and just about everywhere else Bush has the majority or it's evenly split. Without Philly, Bush wins Pennsylvania hands down. Heck, a full 81% of Philadelphians voted for Kerry. That's a lot of votes! I have an over-simplified theory about this.

People who migrate to dense population areas have a socialistic tendency which which correlates better with liberalism. I know it's not entirely true for everyone in all cases, but when you look at the majority, it seems to fit.
I have theory too...people in university cities tend to be more educated....wait, did I say that out loud?

[dizzle]

Ironically I was at a dinner party this weekend with a group of zealous Bush supporters and found myself defending the Mennonite view so that it was not unfairly representted in this group and found myself not particularly popular at that moment.

I submit - and this is just an undercurrent that I have been seeing, and the more liberal here can toss it aside if they wish - I sense that some of the Christian liberal rhetoric is becoming exactly what they profess to dislike in the conservatives. i.e. Solly's jab about "not the right kind of Christian" while all the while doing the same thing in reverse (not Solly in particular - this is a general comment - and certainly not geared to all Christian liberals). Both sides do it, but only one side is painted and demonized as doing so, and that is causing frankly a root of bitterness with me that means I should just butt out of these conversations for a while. Flame away if you will, but as an "outsider" to the extent that I don't get overly involved in the political discussions, I see the Christian liberals doing the exact same things and I personally find it hypocritical. Maybe I need to get some distance and take a breather.

I am going to do that now, which is what I do anyways when I find myself getting contentious with friends, cause for me, no forum debate is worth strife in Christian friendships.

[Pilgrim]

I hear what you are saying Dee Dee. Both sides do engage in it. What I see coming from the left of center is however, born out of a sense of being put on the defensive.

[OneFollowingHim]

I have theory too...people in university cities tend to be more educated....wait, did I say that out loud?
Wow! That's gonna hurt some. We'd have to start a new thread to continue though.

[Kenny]

Oh boy, where are the outcries! If a "conservative" Christian had talked about how we will be under the judgment of God and history for killing our children in the womb and wanting to normalize unnatural sexual deviancy

That too

[Kenny]

I hear what you are saying Dee Dee. Both sides do engage in it. What I see coming from the left of center is however, born out of a sense of being put on the defensive.

Exactly.

I went to a prayer meeting at my church prior to the elections, and even though no one out and out said it at first, it was clear from the tone of the prayers and the things said, that the predominate presupposition of the evening was that God was on Bush’s side and that if Kerry won that would have been God’s judgment upon our nation. The moral issues raised in the prayers all centered around “protecting marriage” and the “protecting the unborn.” I prayed out loud that the church would learn not to be partisan, that we would learn to apply Biblical principles across both sides of the party lines, that we would speak out for the life of the unborn and the integrity of the family, but that we would also defend the cause of the poor and the oppressed and that we would seek to promote peace in the world. Then, shortly thereafter, someone did out and out pray that Bush would win and that “godly principles” would govern our nation, and that Christians would vote based on such principles :doh:

The presupposition that evening was that anyone voting for Kerry (something I was still undecided on) was on the side of evil and darkness while those voting for Bush were on the side of holiness and light. Those “Christians” voting against Bush were either not “real Christians” or they were sadly misinformed and/or even deluded by the Evil One himself. It’s easy to see how that puts us more progressive Christians on the defensive and creates the temptation to react in an equal and opposite way.

That being said, I don’t think that those who voted for Bush are the wrong kind of Christians. I almost voted for him myself – especially given the stem cell research issue and the issue of abortion with the related issue of the next Supreme Court appointees. My wife voted for Bush, mainly for these reasons, and I completely respect her for that.

Nevertheless, what does appall me is how the Republican party in America has all but managed to reign in the American Evangelical subculture and has gotten so many Evangelical Christians to uncritically support its policies, even to the point of identification, sometimes, between the Republican party platform and “Christian values.”

The Church’s job is not to be another partisan political lobby group. Our job is to speak Biblical truth wherever it is needed and let the chips fall where they may.