Previous | Next 

VIEWPOINT
To reform or to restore?

Ewald Unruh

The nature of the church is considered by some to be the most important doctrine for early Anabaptist leaders like Menno Simons and Dirk Philips. Their vision for the church differed from that of the Protestant Reformers. Protestants like Luther and Calvin had a vision for “reforming” and improving the existing church structures. Yet they maintained many of the existing social expectations such as the requirement that all citizens be members of the church, and the strong relationship between clergy and political leaders. In contrast, the Anabaptist vision for the church was one of “restitution”. Their vision was to “restore” the church, to return to the New Testament practice of congregational life. The Anabaptists were convinced that reform was inadequate, and the only alternative was the spontaneous establishing of new churches. In fact, the Anabaptists planted thousands of new churches. For them it was vital, while costly.

The recognition of this difference between reforming and restoring has never before crystalized for me as through my reading in the last few weeks. I recognize the valiant yet often misguided attempts by the Reformers. Yet, despite their good intentions, they allowed church and state regulations to take precedence over the Bible.

There is an ongoing debate today in many denominations. For example, the United Church of Canada has been plagued with serious division following some of its recent decisions. The same issue of reform or restore has been played out among many of that church’s clergy and members. The same issue may also be relevant for consideration in the Mennonite Brethren Church. Should new churches be planted when it is difficult to “reform” a church to a relevant way of doing ministry in the community? Should we work harder at trying to prevent church splits? Is planting a new church a way to multiply the effectiveness of our ministries?

It appears from my reading about the Anabaptists that first came the insatiable desire for Christ and His will. This resulted in the formation of communities for support in the context of an oppressive society. These became “missionary meetings” where the believers received further teaching and then went into their neighbourhoods and lived out radical Christianity. The natural outcome was the establishment of more new churches. This is the missionary nature of a church-planting church and a church-planting conference of churches. Today I hope we can encourage our existing churches to be increasingly mission oriented, help reform those that need it and plant many new vibrant communities of hope. In fulfilling this vision, we will not only be faithful to the Anabaptist vision but also to the New Testament pattern for church life.

Ewald Unruh Is Executive Director of Evangelism for the Canadian MB Conference. He is just completing a year of sabbatical study at MB Biblical Seminary in Fresno, Calif.

Previous | Next 

Last modified May 17, 2000.

© 2000 Mennonite Brethren Herald.
Published by the Canadian Conference of MB Churches.
Masthead and usage information.