In the limited space for this article, the main focus will be the sociology of Mennonite acculturation, followed by a few concluding theological reflections in view of Niebuhr's typology. Every group, including the original group of Christ's disciples, has a culture, or subculture, e.g., the way the disciple group rooted its kingdom lifestyle in its Jewish heritage. The most basic element and spearhead of human culture is learned speech and the group's vehicle of language. Culture is shared by the group s members because it is useful.
Acculturation is simply the acceptance of culture traits by one group from another.
Acculturation should be distinguished from assimilation, which refers to the fusion of two or more cultures, usually a one-sided process by which the members of a minority group are integrated into the host society with some permanent loss to the group accepting the majority culture. The acculturation of Mennonites leads to assimilation and secularization only if the ways and values adopted require a fundamental compromise with the world and result in detrimental changes in Mennonite ethics and lifestyle. Certain studies of Mennonite culture-borrowing have concluded that acculturation in some aspects of its adaptation to a host society does not lead to assimilation and secularization, while in other aspects it does. Calvin Redekop refers to adoption of farm machinery by Mennonites as an instance of acculturation that need not lead to assimilation, while attendance at public schools will more likely lead to assimilation as alien ideas and values are accepted. Whether or not these types of acculturation lead to secularization depends on whether the techniques or values adopted are compatible with historic Mennonite norms.