Talk:Mennonites/Archive 1

message: This article could use some wikification.  The history section especially needs some titles.
Riyehn 20:50, 15 Sep 2004 (UTC)
replies: text:  so write it up!  i don't know anything about this community and would not be qualified to say a word.  this is what wikipedia is for, so you can write it up and include it. r b-j 14:10, 27 October 2005 (UTC)

text: Can you explain more about why you think this demonstrates the weakness of Wikipedia? Is it because people can make innacurate claims or because the aritcle is U.S. centric and theologically conservative? mennonot 21:27, 24 December 2005 (UTC)
replies: text:  i dunno if it is true that Cuauhtémoc is "the largest Mennonite community currently existing" or not.  the fact that we're having this discussion on the talk page rather than seeing it in the article is, to me, demonstrative of WP working.  and i'm right in the middle of a pile of other examples demonstrating that it isn't.  if only the rest of WP worked as well. r b-j 01:58, 25 December 2005 (UTC)

text: You're right. It should include all these things. Feel free to add what you know. DJ Clayworth 16:48, 22 February 2006 (UTC)

text: Jo, ekj denkj daut scheen onn goot senne wudde. I would put them in their own section for now perhaps, since groups like Old Order Mennonites are not in the Swiss-South German Mennonite section. Stettlerj 12:50, 26 April 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Wikification, POV checks, fact dispute, complete representation

message: Someone added a note saying "This appears to be inaccurate" to where I referred to the Amish being a splinter group from the Mennonites, following Joseph Amman. I'm happy to have this challenged, but here are some references I used in making this statement: 
* http://www.amish.net/lifestyle.asp (look under "Amish Origins"
* http://www.religioustolerance.org/amish1.htm under "Amish"
* http://www.amishacres.com/aa_miscellanous/faq.htm question 3
Some other sites say the Amiesh split from the "Swiss Brethren", though it seems most people classified the Swiss Brethren as Mennonites. DJ Clayworth 03:24, 1 May 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Amish

message: There is a new page for this topic which could use expansion by someone with expertise in that area. KHM03 11:44, 13 Jun 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: [[Radical Reformation]]

message: So, I'm wondering if the history section is a little to long for this sort of article.  Should it be a separate article that is linked to at the beginning of the section, as is done in many history sections in other articles?  16:14, 16 October 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: dunno if it would be the best thing to split it off or not, but i'm not opposed to trying it. r b-j 04:04, 17 October 2005 (UTC)

text: The issue for me is not so much accuracy but copyright concerns and plunking copied material into the middle of an article without attention to context. JonHarder 02:14, 6 March 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Separate History? 

message: :The guide to layout doesn't mention Further reading but does specify a Bibliography section. I would see all of those guidelines applying here as well as the same principals as in the external links discussion. My preference would be for someone to rename it to Bibliography and move that section down after References, before External links. In the best of all worlds, and in the long run I would like to see the pertinent material extracted from those sources and placed in the appropriate articles so the section could be folded into the Notes/References sections. JonHarder 02:35, 17 February 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: The layout guide is a guide not a standard set in concrete.  I notice many other articles use titles that work to fit their particular content/contexts.  I have no problem replacing 'Further reading' with something else or using the External links for such sources.  I needed/need a place to pop in temporary sources so that people can see I am not being POV.  (I will remove those temporary or non-representative sources as soon as content consensus is achieved.) I also need a place to attach permanent sources that are applicable to this article following appropriate discussion.  (I was trying to respect all the hard work Jon Harder did on the External Links by not pigging it up again.)   I insist on a balance of links/references from all possible sources here so this article is NPOV.  Much of my material is found in mass media and other sources because few NPOV texts have been written about the realities inside Mennonite congregations.  Please suggest where/how I can source this article as close to the layout guide as possible.  Anacapa 08:02, 17 February 2006 (UTC)

text: I changed the Further reading title to "Further reading from non-Mennonite sources" to show a distinction between sourcing in this article which contains references written by Mennonites for Mennonites.  I will add sources here (some temporary for discussion and some for permanent inclusion) that show as full and and balanced account of Mennonites as possible from the mass media, the scientific literature, and the contemporary/ historical literature.  Since most of the sources used to write this article seem to be Mennonite sources or from Mennonite POV this section is intended to balance, broaden  and, on occasion, check that POV for non-Mennonite readers.  Some criteria I will use as a basis for permanent inclusion of sources include 1)balance and credibility 2)broad studies of Mennonites worldwide, 3) fair-minded studies of extreme congregrations (both orthodox and progressive) or other interesting and uncommon general Mennonite characteristics of broad interest to non-Mennonites 4) inclusion of squelched or censored sources that are significant to understanding Mennonite realities. 5) census and other data that shows the full scope of Mennonite traditions and practices worldwide from orthodox to progressive.  I welcome NPOV comments and suggestions here.Anacapa 01:28, 23 February 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Further reading/layout

message: ::How come all the non-Mennonite source articles are negative. In fact most non-Mennonite source articles about Mennonites are probably positive, and this list seems to insist that all non-Mennonite source articles about Mennonites are negative. Not that the negative does not exist, it does, but I wonder if this list is biased by listing all non-Mennonite sources as negative towards Mennonites. Stettlerj 14:29, 27 February 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Stettler, I not accept this characterization.  Some of my sources were negative, some were positive.  I added an number on new ones today which are both positive, negative and neutral.   I also suggest that how any one person sees a source has a lot to do with who they are and how attached they are to a particular POV.  I will note that before I added these sources that article was sourced with almost all official Church sources which did not reflect any of these realities.  I also note that the content in this article panders to positive POV and needs much NPOV balance.  There is no attempt by me here to add ONLY negative POV.  There is much that is positive about Mennonites.  However, Mennonites have concealed negative POV content about Mennonites in secrecy for centuries which is why Britannica and other mainstream sources seem to omit the 'blood and guts' of Mennonite/Anabaptist histories.  When I begin to see some matches between other sources and Mennonite sources here I will become less what you see as negative and I see as balanced.  I will note that nowhere in any other article have I had to fight so hard for so little even in Feminism or Religion which are highly controversial articles too.  I am American and I note that the same fights go on in the mainstream media over US torture at GITMO.  Yet as a human being I welcome negative stories about Americans who do hienous things like torture so it can be stopped...and so I/we are not the next targets to be tortured by our own government in a police state.  On occasion, some Mennonites have done bad things to others, in the name of God, Menno, or Love which I expect to be shown here.  In the past these traditions have been silenced, concealed and covered up much like the US government is doing with ongoing torture.  Sometimes there is a negative reaction to such news but that is from the POV of the beholder.  I will also note that some Mennonites see negative news as very positive because it allows them to face issues head on.  This is what Linda Espenshade found in her four part series Silenced by Shame about Mennonite/Amish Domestic Violence, Child sexual abuse and incest.  So again, positive or negative perception often depends on the POV of the reader rather than the content IMHO.Anacapa 04:55, 5 March 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Non-Mennonite source articles: Negative, Positive, Neutral Or Eye of the Beholder?

message: ::Wow, you are really determined... you know you missed a recent book about an excommunicated Amish that you could use as ammunition. You seem to not know it is out there otherwise you would certainly be quoting it's title. It is Chris Burkholder - Former Amish writes tell-all, and you know, I will probably read it myself, i guess the "mind control" did not work for me :). By the way, were you really Mennonite, and if so, if you don't mind me asking, what kind precisely? Although there is an old order group called "orthodox mennonites" in Ontario, it is such a small group I would be surprised if you came from there. But you never know with all the mennonite subgroups, maybe there is another one with that name  Stettlerj 02:49, 1 March 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: By the way I would suggest reading Miriam Toews book, A complicated kindness. It won the governor general's award in Canada. I don't think Mennonites are scared of this part of their history, as you seem to suggest. The author also does not portray Mennonites all that badly anyway, and the author is proud to consider herself a Mennonite today although a non practicing one. Stettlerj 03:11, 1 March 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Stettlerj, please do not mistake determination for hatred.  From your Amish tell all, and other sources including Ms Toews (see the A Complicated Kind of Author link on this article) there are still quite a few (number and faces unknown of course) people including innocents who are being hurt by shunning or others forms of hidden violence inside official Amish/Mennonite silence, shame, and denial.  When I see official Mennonite or Amish leaders ahead of the news media on this and other uncomfortable topics, I will be able to go back to 'sleep'. Shame kills, lies kill, and denial kills which is what (rather than who) I do hate here.  Thanks for the source on the Amish...it could help us all with Excommunication, Shunning and Amish but please notice that I added a source from Amish in their own words too in Amish because I value all POV's and hate to see a whole article about a whole group of people with no statements from them about themselves.  I am tickled to see that you still have your mind!  However, mind control is quite insidious so I always wonder about myself (now watch the character assassins here have a field day with this!)  I will not disclose who I am here.  I suggest you glance at your talk page, the history of this article and the Silenced by Shame series to understand why.  I will do what I can to respect those here who respect me however with feedback, comments and sources.   Your willingness to share 'negative' content goes a long way with me and I will not intentionally abuse it or use it as ammunition for perjorative reasons.  I will go find Complicated Kindness because I like authors who call a spade a spade in the face of shame.  I think you might be one of the least scared Mennonites(?) here on these pages which is nice to see.Anacapa 03:22, 6 March 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Other sources both 'good' and 'bad'

message: Anacapa, no problem. Let's try and work together. I don't know whether other Mennonits consider the Haldemans to be part of the general Mennonite fellowship - I suspect not, since their doctrines are so radically different from other Mennonites. So here is my point. Putting the link here makes it seem like the statements on the website apply to all Mennonites - even if you didn't intend that, it's how people will read it. The statements don't apply to most Mennonites so it is misleading. Putting the link on the Haldeman Mennonite page is clear and relevant. I don't see what the problem is with simply moving the link (though you'd have to take into account the objections from ClairSamoht above, which I agree with to some extent).
:I too am willing to work with you on this.  I will also be glad to pull this link from the Mennonite page the moment I see someone write up a sound sourced statement in the Mennonite article stating that the Haldemans are NOT Mennonites.  As for that statement that this link  applies to all Mennonites I will change the link title now to eliminate that mistaken perception and show the source biases. I added the further reading section precisely because there are many types of Mennonites which need to be shown both orthodox and progressive that are not well represented in the Mennonite article now.  There is no known and sourced consensus on most Mennonites now which is obvious from reading the news sources against the article here.  There is no Mennonite POPE who enforces one type of Mennonitism worlwide.  Mennonites have been and are a fractious bunch with much variety in many independent denominations.  This needs to be well-represented here.  If the Haldemans are indeed Mennonites article about the Haldemans belong here because they represent one rather extreme example of the full scope of Mennonitism.  I will also note that the Holdeman articles states how closely Haldemans follow core Mennonite doctrine (as do other orthodox Mennonite churches I know of) so this link contains much that is representative of orthodox Mennonite theology and is therefore at least temporarily relevant as we discuss this.  Again I just want to see us discuss this so we bring real represention to this article and let the chips fall where they may.Anacapa 02:15, 1 March 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Holdeman Mennonites: Are they Mennonites/Representative of Mennonites?

message: :As for the Holdeman Mennonites, I am not stating that they are not Mennonites. Their theology may be similar to other Mennonites in many ways. However, on the evidence I have been able to find, including the links I posted above, one of the ways in which their theology differs significantly from other Mennonites is in this 'one true church' aspect that the link talks about. Holdeman's believe they are the only church, other Mennonites do not. Once again I have to say that the proper place for a link that entirely talks about one very small Mennonite subgroup is on the article about that subgroup. 
:You also said, two days ago, "I will also be glad to soure some of the many ONE TRUE CHURCH statements in the Anabaptist/Mennonite Faith Confessions". However I don't see any of these statements here. I have provided two links to official Mennonite sources that state the opposite very clearly. DJ Clayworth 18:19, 1 March 2006 (UTC)
replies: text:  I also said please be patient then.  There are many confusing issues to sort out here.  First, I have to know who is who and where and who worships what, why and how so we can decide what links are relevant at all here.  I am guessing from the discussions that Holdemans are considered Mennonites but I notice no one has come out and stated anything one way or the other.  To me, anyone who calls themselves Mennonite is Mennonite but that is just my POV.
Could you run this to ground first with sources? My hands are full right now. Anacapa 03:54, 6 March 2006 (UTC)

text: Yes the Holdeman's are considered Mennonites by most people, including the World Mennonite Conference. As for sorting out confusing issues, if you are not certain that your link applied to most Mennonites then the link should be removed; in fact I've done so. See below. If and when you come back with sources to indicate the general applicability of the link then it can go back. I gave you sources above which show very clearly that neither Mennonite Brethren nor Mennonite Church consider that they are the one true church. That's a big chunk of Mennonites right there. DJ Clayworth 19:42, 7 March 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Holdemans again (please move to that section)

message: :Anacapa, since you say you grew up among Mennonites with a theology similar to the Holdemans, maybe you should say which subgroup this is. Then we can start to identify which subgroups hold to that kind of theology and which do not. DJ Clayworth 18:21, 1 March 2006 (UTC)
replies: text:  I insist on all groups with all forms of worship/theology be shown in an article about all Mennonites.  If I was a Mennonite in India or Africa or South America or even in our neighbor Mexico I would want to myself well and fairly represented in the article especially since 'I' do outnumber US/Canada Mennonites so much.  I don't see how telling you about those groups I know of makes much difference here.  This article is not about me or you.  It is about ALL Mennonites.  I also suggest you read recent comments I made on your talk page and the history of character assassination attempts on this article's edit comments to see why I might be hesitant to become so specific.  (yes I was an outraged beginner on wiki and I could have been cleaner too then but I did and I do refrain from personal attacks here) Anacapa 03:54, 6 March 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Personal question

message: On a lighter note, congrats to Cindy Klassen a Mennonite girl, woman, who won five medals and lighted up the olympics for canada at Turin! Stettlerj 02:11, 28 February 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Yay, good one Cindy! DJ Clayworth
Also Ben Heppner who sang the national anthem for Canadian segment of the Olympic closing ceremony is or was a Mennonite. (He is a soloist on current West Coast Mennonite Chamber Choir CDs.) JonHarder 03:19, 1 March 2006 (UTC)

text: Maybe we should add to List of Mennonites. DJ Clayworth 18:28, 1 March 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: On a lighter note

message: I added the one true church link back because it has content that is common to all orthodox (as in the dictionary) Mennonite churches.  Please do not remove it again until we finish this discussion to avoid edit wars.  I will note that the Further reading section is not covered by Jon Harder's rules above...however I do intend to follow his rules for Further reading as much as possible as soon as we achieve some consensus here.  I have read all the points several other editors made above about the One True Church link and many of them make sense to me.  However, I see no reflection in the article of orthodox Mennonite worship.  Since the Church of God in Christ, Mennonite Holdemans are closer to Menno Simons and orthodox Mennonitism than are so-called 'modern' Mennonites this source is of general interest (both present day and historical) and is a source for the main article...IMHO.  That said, I also want to be fair to modern Mennonites who do not want to be steoreotyped falsely as extreme One True church Mennonites.
So here is what I suggest.  We add complete, balanced and NPOV content in the main article summarizing Menno Simon's doctrines and orthodox Mennonitism using the Holdemans as one example and adding other known orthodox churches as we find them such as Stettler found in Excommunication.  Once that is complete, we link the Holdemans article here and then I move the One True Church link to the Holdeman article along with all other non-general Holdeman related sources in Further reading.  Will this satisfy all the concerns discussed above?  Please comment and where problems occur please suggest possible solutions that speak to NPOV balance here.  In the meantime, I will wait and add no new Holdeman content to Further reading. Anacapa 06:41, 14 March 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I agree with the idea to summarise 'mainstream' Mennonite doctrine and to take a couple of examples. If we do that we should take an example from the mainstream and an example from the stricter communities. Logically the mainstream should be either Mennonite Brethren or Mennonite Church, since they are the largest. As for the others I would think that Old Order Mennonite or Old Order Amish would be better examples since they are larger. However I would have no particular objection to using the Holdemans as the strict example. Incidentally the 'one true church' link is already on that article. DJ Clayworth 18:49, 14 March 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: One True Church Link

message: For anyone interested, an article on Lombard Mennonite Church is being considered for deletion. You can  share your thought at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Lombard Mennonite Church. JonHarder 14:39, 16 March 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: The result was merge to :Illinois Mennonite Conference. JonHarder 20:01, 25 March 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Lombard Mennonite Church 

message: I notice there is a See also link to the Beachy Amish here.  Could anyone tell me whether they are considered Amish or Mennonite for the purposes of membership?  Scott says they are much closer now to Mennonite than Amish but I'd like some other sources so we can decide where they belong.Anacapa 08:05, 20 March 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Beachy Amish Mennonites

message: I cut the following PP and moved it here for discussion as it seems to have little specific content about Mennonites and as it seems to have content that belongs in the CPS article itself.  Please discuss comment.  Feel free to demand that I put it back if I am completely off base here.
:The CPS men served without wages and minimal support from the federal government. The cost of maintaining the CPS camps and providing for the needs of the men was the responsibility of their congregations and families. Mennonite Central Committee coordinated the operation of the Mennonite camps. CPS men served longer than regular draftees, not being released until well past the end of the war. Initially skeptical of the program, government agencies learned to appreciate the men's service and requested more workers from the program.  CPS made significant contributions to forest fire prevention, erosion and flood control, medical science and reform of the mental health system.Anacapa 02:52, 11 April 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: CPS content edit

message: DJ I like the content you added here. I have a few questions but it seems to flow quite well with other sections. Thanks for filling this in. I will be back soon to ask a few questions where i am confused/unclear but I expect no major issues because this looks like a very complete NPOV representation of the Moderates at least to me. Anacapa 04:06, 15 April 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Types of Worship/Moderate subsection content

message: Jon, I see you removed two references that I plan to use as sources.  They are The Complete Writings of Menno Simons and Encyclopedia of American Religions both of which have NPOV content that is highly relevant to this article.  Please explain the basis for these deletions as I put them there to give all editors prior chances to review them before I go in and add the content.
Anacapa 01:27, 18 April 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: The references section is for sources used in creating the main text and cited in the notes. One would typically add the references after the material has been added to the main article. This page is better for communicating with other editors. JonHarder 12:12, 24 April 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Ok fine but please explain next time with edit comments so I have no cause to suspect POV motivations here.Anacapa 02:51, 27 April 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: References

message: I reverted Stettlerj's last changes to allow to finish resolving what are huge POV issues and so we could consense on little issues such as the use of 'bewildering' to describe the countless confusing distinctions between Conservative subsection groups.  Since Stettlerj made a few changes before this revert, I am going to go back and restore the orginal content although I plan to keep changes that Stettlerj made that seem fine to me.  My intent is to reestablish the basic content in it's original form so that we can discuss each issue bit by bit here.  Prior to attaining some sort of consensus I will add NO NEW content to either section and I ask that no one else edit content to the any 'Types' section above the Moderate subsection until we have some consensus.  (Since no one seems to have a problem with the Moderate content or Progressive content I welcome ongoing editing in those subsections.)  I am doing this to try to keep the peace.  I mean no offense to Stettlerj...I hope to work with her to meet her issues and mine in a reasonable, complete, balanced NPOV way here.  I also am fine with her added content about the first European split.  I will be back in 1-3 days to listen to where people are here.  I welcome other editors to weigh in too but I insist on reasonable and specific criteria for changes to this content that apply to the whole article as well.  I also ask that all editors make a good faith attempt to read the LONG discussions about this and listen to my criteria/concerns/intent on this section so we can actually come to some sort of consensus on these sections/subsections that is fair to all sources/POV's. Anacapa 05:49, 20 April 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Pause on Types of Worship/Schisms to attain consensus?

message: After all those long winded (and possibly pointless) discussions above I am going to title this subsection again based on direct quotes below.  The intent here is to keep this section simple, clean and reasonably representative rather than listing each of hundreds of independent churches by themselves.  If other editors take issue with this, I insist on some reasonable discussions before reverts (or edits such as softening the discipline statements) or I will call a POV check here.
Quotes on Holdemans:
*"In denying that Jesus was made from the seed of Mary, the Christology of this church is probably closer to the teachings of Menno Simons and Melchior Hoffman than any other Mennonite group."
*"...a separate group (in 1859) with emphasis on the "true lineage" of the church, evangelical conversion, church discipline, and the shunning of the excommunicated" (Scott|198)
Quotes on the Reformed Mennonite Church:
*"They saw themselves as the only true followers of Menno Simons teachings"  (Scott|107)
*"a kind of fundamentalism with how the scripture had been written; and a determination, remarkably strong even for Mennonites, to achieve a truly pure church through uncompromising discipline."  (McMaster|227)
*"although one part of him (founder Francis Herr) sought purity of faith by carrying certain Anabaptist-Mennonite principles to their limits, another part sought assurance more along the paths of the Pietiest and revivalists. (McMaster|227)
Anacapa 02:29, 27 April 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I don't think Wikipedia is the place to make up new designations for groups. Some individuals in "mainstream" Mennonite churches could be described as fundamentalists, while others in Reformed Mennonite churches, for example, may be there because it's tradition, so I don't see how this title clarifies anything. Also, why are the Holdeman Mennonites and the Reformed Mennonites put together. If they both think they are the one true church, that means they don't recognise each other, so I am not sure they would appreciate being put together. What do you think.  Stettlerj 13:50, 27 April 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Fundamentalist instead of Orthodox

message: I have a real problem with the addition of "and all other churches" to the Schletheim Confession in the Theology section.  The wording implies meaning that they could not possibly have intended when they wrote it.  The Anabaptists rejected the Catholic Church, and other movements that had beliefs and practices contrary to the confession, but "churches" implies a denominational organization that just wasn't in place at the time.  There was no Anabaptist Church, so how could they reject "all other churches"? 
For now, I'm going to remove that, though maybe we can come to a decision on some better wording. Sxeptomaniac 20:39, 16 May 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Schleitheim Confession Separation line 

message: In the Beliefs section I found one of the sentences caused a bit of confusion to me, meaning that I had to read it twice. Specifically, in the bullet point labelled Horse and Buggy Old Order Mennonites. The sentence is: 
″they stress separation from the world, excommunication, and the wearing of plain clothes.″ - On first reading my brain read it as separation from the world, separation from excommunication, and separation from the wearing of plain clothes. Which is why I was confused.
Would it cause confusion or dilute the meaning of this sentence to change it to something like: ″they stress separation from the world, the wearing of plain clothes, and excommunication.″?
Efan78 (talk) 16:24, 9 December 2020 (UTC)
replies: text: That would not dilute the meaning, no. It is a list of three items. The order is probably better because they don't actually stress excommunication, but they do practice it. So  might even be better. Walter Görlitz (talk) 17:57, 9 December 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  Beliefs