I talked to a good friend of mine after my post a few weeks ago: “Sometimes I Wonder about this Thing Called Separation.” In the process of that conversation, I gained a clearer understanding of what I think about separation.
I don’t think Christians should talk about separation at all.
Or at least, very little. It’s too negative a word. It carries with it images of a school child sitting alone in a cafeteria, a big space between him and the other kids, because he is not cool. People riding together on a bus, with all the dark ones in the back and and all the light ones in the front. A leper trailing through the streets of an ancient city, ringing a bell and crying, “Unclean, unclean!”
Separation cuts people out.
If we want to talk about separation, we should use it in the context of separating from sin or from objects that lead us to sin. Separation from the grocery story where I buy those little puffing sticks that hurt my children because they take me away from them too soon. Separation from the screen where I see the images that hurt my wife. Separation from hurtful words. Separation from pride.
And when we want to talk about this concept of living a holy and obedient life, we should not term it as “separation” but sanctification.
Consider Jesus.
Was he separate?
He was certainly sanctified.
Sanctification puts the focus where it should be–on our holy God–instead of where it shouldn’t be–on us unholy humans who are always trying to do things right to make it up to him. Separation is about what I don’t do…but like Jesus said, if a demon leaves a man and returns to find him still empty, he will bring with him seven demons more, so that the last state of the man is worse than the first.
Separation without sanctification is like that, an emptiness without a filling, a “holy” hell ground. So let’s not talk any more about separation.
Let’s talk about sanctification.
***
I appreciate all your comments on my last post. You had wise things to say. What do you have to say about the subject of sanctification versus separation? Is my distinction correct? How would you describe it?
I say “amen!”
‘Separation is about what I don’t do’
This I believe is a popular but entirely flawed concept of separation. I think true biblical separation is much more about thinking and doing. Sanctification will result in separation, but separation in and of itself will not result in sanctification.
Just my thoughts…:)
Thank you for your thoughts. :)
All of God’s truth walks on two legs, a tension between two right principles. One without the other is useless – think positive and negative with electricity or male and female in reproduction. For too long the conservative Anabaptists have focused on separation without providing due corresponding focus on sanctification. Both need to be discussed but sanctification needs the primary emphasis. With no discussion on separation practical issues become murky and confused. Salvation is a trinity – justification, sanctification, and glorification. When individuals and churches get these tensions in correct balance with each other the result is most compelling!
I understand what you’re saying about practical issues becoming murky if they’re not discussed. Thank you for these thoughts. I think what trips me up is the term separation. It gives me the connotation of insularity, of being different just for the sake of being different. I understand and embrace the fact that Christians owe primary allegiance to a heavenly kingdom and should live as such. And also that we shouldn’t be a part of the world system that’s driven by greed, etc. But all of this gets really confusing really quickly if you take it literally and not just spiritually. What does it mean to not be a part of the world system? I see a lot of conservative Anabaptists who dress “plain” and are some of the most successful businessmen in their communities. I don’t think that’s necessarily wrong, especially if they use their money to do good…but why is it okay to be part of one system and not the other? That’s why I qualify my use of “separation” as separation from sin. Not from people. Not from the basic ways of living we all use. Not necessarily from culture, unless it’s an aspect of culture that draws me away from Jesus.
Yes you put it so clearly. I don’t understand how radio broadcasting, for example, is any more worldly and of-our-times than free market capitalism, but I assume people who believe that would have an easy response?
Lise, that’s a good example of what can come up as inconsistencies. I grew up in a family that didn’t listen to the radio. It was mostly a way of staying away from what my parents thought might be bad influence, songs and stuff. Not that they thought the radio in itself was wrong. But now my family uses the internet, and there are a lot of things that could be a bad influence there. :) People often make choices to do things a certain way because of the way they were brought up and how it influences them to think. I think if we understand that people think within their cultures, it can help us to have a little more grace for all the seeming inconsistencies. I like to see people trying to follow Jesus and to live a pure life. Even if I don’t always agree with the individual choices, it helps to see beyond that to the bigger thing they were trying for.
By the way, Chester, in case my first reply didn’t make it clear, I really appreciate these thoughts and agree with what you are saying. Just trying to sort through my own thoughts about separation and thought maybe you would have further insight to clarify mine.
I appreciate the drift and tone of the conversation resulting from your recent post.
As long as the focus of “separation” remains separatist all kinds of strange phenomena develop. But when “separation” is the fall-out from unfeigned love for Christ and genuine delight in His ways, few inconsistencies remain. Unfortunately, many conservative Anabaptists who have become worldly in their economics (unsanctified and unseparated), do not really know the Living Christ who has spoken directly on the economics issue. When elaborate defenses develop to justify any kind of selfishness, the heart has revealed itself. Not much needs to be explained about any practice resulting from a love/faith relationship with Christ – it is just obvious – and enormously attractive! I admire every practical non-self-righteous quiet statement of loyalty to the King of the Other Kingdom that I encounter along the way.
Chester Weaver (not anonymous)
I’ve started reading The Complete Writings of Menno Simons, and I notice this repeated emphasis on being born again into a kind of life, that following Christ is participating in His life. So when Menno Simons and Michael Sattler write about separation, they are talking about visible reality participating in a greater invisible reality that is at the same time flesh and body–Jesus Christ. I think what Anabaptists lost over the years is the sense that conversion is being drawn into a kind of life, which is always participating in the fuller reality of Word made flesh. Instead of delighting in the person of Christ and becoming remade in his image, we began focusing on just the visible reality of what a redeemed life could look like. And so, over several centuries, separation became a sign separated from what it signifies–the fullness of Christ’s life and person, thus losing its meaning and appeal to those who have not yet tasted, as Chester says, the “genuine delight” in Christ.
That’s really deep, Rachel. And challenging to me personally. Thank you for sharing this insight.
“Instead of delighting in the person of Christ and becoming remade in his image, we began focusing on just the visible reality of what a redeemed life could look like.” Such a pithy explanation for where we as Anabaptists so often get off the track.
Thanks, Chester. You put this in words that ring true.
Amen
Hi Lucinda,
I think your observation is correct. Without Sanctification we can not even hold on to our separation for a very long time, and we are bound to fall back sooner or later to our disobediences.
Thanks.
Thank you, Theo.
I like your blog! Still about separation (if I may!), I’d like to share my perspective too, because I’ve wondered about these things!
When I compare my own non-anabaptist culture and those of the Mennonite etc. groups around me, what stands out most is the cliched observation that people are people wherever you go, and that every culture has its strengths and weaknesses. Not that there aren’t especially good or especially bad cultures, but it definitely doesn’t seem like anabaptist cultures, say, are dramatically and other-worldly different than others. I really don’t get that ‘other kingdom’ belief any more than, say, urban environmentalists saying that they live in “another kingdom” compared to hunters. Like, if me and my friends were aiming above all else to be 8 feet tall, that wouldn’t actually mean that our neighbours were living among a race of giants, if that makes sense. It’s the supernatural element of the doctrine of separation that I don’t see; it seems tacked on. If it were literally a different kingdom you’d think there would be fairly stark differences. But the spectrum of types you run into seems about the same inside or outside the ‘kingdom of heaven’.
Anyway it’s a very interesting topic!
Lise, it’s good to have you here and glad you like the blog. Good point about people being people wherever you go. That is definitely true, Anabaptists or otherwise. I do understand and like the concept of two kingdoms, but I think that is something that is fulfilled more completely in heaven. We can align ourselves with God’s kingdom now and grow toward him. But it’s not like the Anabaptists are part of his Kingdom and others are not. Rather, the kingdom of God is bigger than all of us, but we all have an opportunity to choose Jesus’ way and help to build his kingdom. Would you agree with that?
I guess it doesn’t really matter what you call it. In some ways it can be of play of words or splitting hairs maybe? But when we are sactified we just will be be separate from the world in more ways than one. The separation the Bible speaks about- I don’t think of it as distancing yourself from others and not walking among men, or a child sitting alone in a cafeteria. We’ll just be different. To me it’s a comforting thought to be separate from the spiritual darkness of the world and all that comes with it. 2 Corinthians 6:17, Wherefore come out from among them, and be ye separate, saith the Lord, and touch not the unclean thing: and I will receive you, and I will be a Father unto you, and ye shall be my sons and daughters..
Jesus, He still walked among men and didn’t separate himself from people and the ones who needed Him most.
I think in a lot of ways it is a play on words. :) Love these thoughts.
Any believer’s practical separation that fully takes into account the way Jesus was separate from sin, but still in the house eating and enjoying fellowship with a bunch of sinners and his new disciples, has my full respect.
Read Mat 9:9-13
It is alive and full of meaning. May I learn from Him!
The account in Matthew is beautiful and does clearly show how Jesus was separate from sin but not from sinners. Thank you for sharing it!