News archive

. Mennonite Church USA—Confronting a Landscape of Change. Sidebar: Sidebar: Designing the study. Mennonite Ministers and Members—Profiles in Contrast. Racial/Ethnic Mennonites in the U.S.—Opportunities and Challenges.

Mennonite Church USA—Confronting a Landscape of Change

By Conrad L. Kanagy

What does it mean to be a Mennonite in the 21 st century? How have perceptions of Anabaptist identity changed over time? The frequency with which these questions arise among Mennonites suggests anxiety and uncertainty about possible responses. The transformation of two Mennonite denominations into one, the continued assimilation of Mennonites into the broader American culture, important regional differences among Mennonites, and the growth of Racial/Ethnic congregations challenge efforts to provide answers to these questions.

In 1972 J. Howard Kauffman and Leland Harder launched Church Member Profile I, a comprehensive survey of five Anabaptist denominations in North America. Joined by Leo Driedger, they conducted a follow-up study in 1989. In 2006, Donald B. Kraybill of the Young Center of Elizabethtown College (Pa.) led a three-person team that conducted a profile of three denominations—Mennonite Church USA, the Church of the Brethren and the Brethren in Christ (see sidebar). The current essay reports initial findings from the study of Mennonite Church USA.

Mennonite Identity

When Mennonites in 2006 were asked to identify the two religious words that “best described” them, two-thirds chose “Mennonite” or “Anabaptist.” Eighty-four percent of pastors chose these two words as did 41% of Racial/Ethnic members.

Most Loyal to Their Congregation

Like other Americans, Mennonites are more committed to their congregation than to their denomination or area conference. Thirty-four percent of Mennonite members said they are “very strongly” committed to the denomination and 12% to their area conference. In comparison, 58% are “very strongly” committed to their local congregation.

At the same time, more members today (48%) than in 1972 (25%) say they will always want to remain a member of their denomination. This level of loyalty is slightly lower than for Conservative Protestants (52%) in the U.S. but higher than among Mainline Protestants (37%).

More New Members

A major shift among Mennonites over the past three decades has been the increase in members from other denominations. The percent of “non-cradle” Mennonites—neither parent being Mennonite—has risen since 1972 from 17% to 26% and the percent who married a spouse from another denomination has risen from 25% to 39% in that same period.

Aging Membership

The average age of Mennonites today is 54 years, five years older than in 1989. More important, however, is the shifting age distribution of Mennonites. In 1972, 54% of Mennonites were between 18 and 45 years of age—within what demographers refer to as childbearing age. This number declined to 45% in 1989 and is only 30% today. This change has been more extreme for Mennonites than even for Mainline Protestant denominations, which a recent study described as “literally dying out” because of similar changes in their age distribution. Among Mainline Protestant denominations, 42% of members are under 45 years of age compared to 52% of Conservative Protestants.

Regional Differences

Mennonites differ in important ways depending on where they live. For example:

• Mennonites in the West are more likely to have come from other denominations—38% baptized in an “other than Mennonite” congregation compared to 23% in the East and South, and 22% in the Midwest.
• Mennonites in the Midwest are most likely to be “cradle” Mennonites, with 72% with parents who were both Mennonite.
• Mennonites in the South are less mobile than other Mennonites, with 40% living in the same community for 30 years or more.
• Mennonites in the East are most rural—only 13% live in cities of 50,000 or more residents compared to 71% of Westerners.

Growth among Racial/Ethnic Congregations

The growth of Racial/Ethnic congregations is changing the face of Mennonite Church USA. The term Racial/Ethnic is a self-designation by Mennonite Church USA groups with members that include those who are African-American, Latino/Hispanic, Native American, Asian and “other than Anglo.” In the past five years, 25% of the denomination’s new members have been Racial/Ethnic compared to just 6% among those members who entered the denomination more than five years ago.

Increased Assimilation

In 1972, 36% of Mennonites lived on a farm compared to 12% today. While almost twice as many Mennonites reside in large cities (cities with 250,000 or more residents) today as in 1972, this number still accounts for less than 10% of all Mennonites.

In their work, more Mennonites hold business and professional occupations compared with three decades ago—41% today and 23% in 1972. And twice as many Mennonites have college degrees today (38%) as in 1972 (19%).

Greater Political Identification

In 1972, 37% of Mennonites claimed no political party identity compared to only 11% today. Increases have occurred for both Republicans and Democrats. In 1972, 42% of Mennonites identified themselves as Republicans while 50% did so in 2006. During this same period Democrats nearly doubled from 12% to 22%. But in the last presidential election, two-thirds of Mennonites who voted did so for George W. Bush.

Changing Church Attendance.

While the percent of Mennonite who regularly attend church has remained about the same since 1972, church attendance for Mennonites has become largely a “once a week” event, with the percent who attend more than once a week dropping from 43% in 1972 to 8% today. In addition, the proportion who attend Sunday school has declined from 71% in 1972 to 53% today.

Conclusion

These early findings of Mennonite Member Profile 2006 have important implications for Mennonite identity as well as the future of Mennonite Church USA. Among these implications are both challenges and opportunities:

• The growth of members from other than Mennonite backgrounds is good news for a denomination interested in becoming more missional—calling all people to a primary allegiance to Jesus Christ. Integrating these members into the denomination remains a challenge, however, since they are more ambivalent about an Anabaptist identity than are other members.

• The shift in age among Mennonites is a critical issue for the denomination. Without a major influx of younger persons, questions of Anabaptist identity will take a backseat to the question of mere survival.

• The findings about Racial/Ethnic members are among the most encouraging of this study. Not only are these members younger on average, they also bring a rich spiritual diversity to Mennonite Church USA.

• The shift to Sunday morning worship as the only religious service of the week along with the decline in Sunday school attendance, pose challenges for pastors and congregations seeking to influence members who are less engaged in church and increasingly more assimilated in the broader culture.

• The forces of modern and postmodern culture—professionalism, education, individualism and suburbanization—continue to shape Mennonites who are more assimilated in the broader culture than ever before.

• The increased political identification of Mennonites threatens to polarize members around controversial issues.

• Regional differences make for rich diversity but also challenge churchwide discernment efforts.

The two accompanying articles will focus on what we are learning about Mennonite Racial/Ethnic members and Mennonite pastors.

Conrad L. Kanagy, Ph.D., is Mennonite Member Profile 2006 Director, Associate Professor of Sociology at Elizabethtown College, and an ordained minister in Lancaster Mennonite Conference of Mennonite ChurchUSA. He is author of the forthcoming book Road Signs and Guideposts that provides an in-depth look at the issues addressed in these three essays. The book will be accompanied by a set of congregational resources on DVD and CD.

The author wishes to acknowledge the following persons who reviewed and provided helpful feedback for these essays: Ron Byler, Leonard Dow, Gilberto Flores, Keith Harder, Rodolfo Jimenez, Donald Kraybill, Marty Lehman, Iris de Leon-Hartshorn, Laura Livengood, Freeman Miller, Yvonne Platts, Marathana Prothro, Valentina Satvedi, Jim Schrag, Jorge Vallejos, and Roy Williams. Many thanks also to the nearly 100 persons who participated in consultations about this project, to the other two members of the three-denominational research team (Carl D. Bowman of Bridgewater College and Donald Kraybill of Elizabethtown College), and to the many congregations, members, and pastors who so graciously participated in Mennonite Member Profile 2006.

Mennonite Member Profile 2006 was funded by grants from Mennonite Church USA Executive Leadership and churchwide agencies, including a major grant from MMA. Other financial support was made possible by Schowalter Foundation, Mennonite Central Committee, Mennonite Disaster Service, Mennonite Financial Services, Eastern Mennonite Missions, Goodville Mutual Casualty Company and private contributors.

Sidebar: Designing the study

In the summer of 2005, one hundred and twenty-four Mennonite Church USA congregations were selected from the denominational database of 965. A scientific selection process insured that members of these congregations would be representative of all members in Mennonite Church USA. Pastors received a letter of invitation for their congregation to participate in the study. Nearly 85% of these congregations submitted a membership directory. Those who declined or failed to respond were replaced, resulting in a final sample of 120 participating congregations.

Using membership directories from participating congregations, members 18 years of age and older were randomly selected to receive a survey. This process yielded a database of 3,080 members and their addresses. Mennonite Member Profile 2006 was mailed on February 14. By early summer, 76% of respondents had returned a useable questionnaire for a total number of 2,216 surveys.

Racial/Ethnic persons are usually underrepresented in social science research. This was true of the 1972 and 1989 Church Member Profiles, which included too few Racial/Ethnic members for any meaningful analysis. Because of this historic under-representation, Mennonite Member Profile 2006 included a special sample of Racial/Ethnic members from twenty-two congregations in three urban areas— Philadelphia, Chicago, and Los Angeles. Combining Racial/Ethnic members who were part of the representative member sample with those in the urban sample yielded a sample size of 475 Racial/Ethnic members in Mennonite Member Profile 2006. The Racial/Ethnic distribution of these combined samples was 26% African American, 25% Latino/Hispanic, 25% Asian, 4% Native American, 6% African immigrant, 9% mixed, and 7% other.

Project Partners in each urban area invited congregational participation. Partners were Yvonne Platts and Freeman Miller who represented the Philadelphia Urban Ministries Partnership (PUMP), Rodolfo Jimenez who serves with Mennonite Central Committee in Chicago, and Valentina Satvedi who represented the Center for Anabaptist Leadership in Los Angeles. The work of these partners was critical to the participation and overall response of congregations in these urban areas.

In addition, five hundred active and active without charge Mennonite ministers also received a full-length member profile. Three hundred and nineteen ministers returned a completed profile for a response rate of 65%.

Andrew Greeley and Michael Hout. The Truth About Conservative Christians. IL: University of Chicago Press, 2006.

Greeley and Hout, 2006.

Mennonite Ministers and Members—Profiles in Contrast

By Conrad L. Kanagy

Mennonite Member Profile 2006 was sent to a sample of 500 active and active without charge ministers in Mennonite Church USA. Sixty-five percent of these ministers responded to the survey. What have we learned about Mennonite pastors and how they compare to lay members?

Childhood Socialization

Differences between pastors and lay members show up early in life. Pastors attended church more regularly as children than members—96% attended weekly compared to 87% of members. Pastors (59%) are more likely to identify a “specific moment” when they accepted Christ as Lord and Savior compared to members (49%) And pastors were baptized earlier in their lives—at 12.5 years of age on average compared to 13.9 for members.  

Demographics

The average age of pastors and members is the same (54 years), and pastors are as likely as members to have “other than Mennonite” backgrounds. But pastors differ substantially in educational levels, with 75% having a college education compared to 38% of members. Pastors are much more likely to have had a Mennonite education than members, with 30% attending a Mennonite high school (17% of members), 35% graduating from a four-year Mennonite college or university (19% of members) and 40% graduating from a Mennonite seminary (2% of members).

Spirituality

Indicators of spirituality among ministers are higher than among members. Sixty-eight percent of pastors report that their religious beliefs are the “most important thing in their life,” compared to 44% of members. Eighty-one percent of pastors describe their relationship with God as “close” or “very close” compared to 67% of members. And 87% of pastors identify themselves as “born again” compared to 78% of members.

Theology

Pastors tend to select “middle” responses when asked about theological beliefs, likely reflecting their understanding of the complexity of theological issues. While a majority of members (51%) believe that “God controls most events in my daily life,” more pastors (64%) chose a different response—“God guides me, but does not control the events of my daily life.”

When asked why Jesus died on the cross, members (84%) were more likely than pastors 64%) to say that “Jesus had to die to complete God’s plan of salvation.” Responding to the same question, pastors (24%) were more likely than members (9%) to say that “Jesus willingly died to show the power of nonviolent love.”

The Holy Spirit

Pastors are more like Racial/Ethnic members in their experiences of the Holy Spirit than are other members. Seventy-seven percent of pastors believe that the charismatic gifts of the Holy Spirit are “genuine gifts of God’s Spirit to some Christians” compared to 61% of members. And 66% of pastors (compared to 44% of members) have personally experienced charismatic gifts including casting out demons, speaking in tongues, prophesying, the baptism of the Holy Spirit and healing. Forty-six percent of pastors state that these experiences have been within the past year.

Politics

Pastors are often more politically liberal than members and more concerned about issues of social justice. Pastors are evenly divided between political parties (29% identifying with each party) compared with members who are far more likely to be Republican than Democrat. More pastors choose “Independent” (27%) than do members (15%).

Pastors are more aware of issues of racism in the church and more supportive of efforts to overcome these, with 41% saying it is “very important” that church leaders discuss and address issues of racism compared to 28% of members.

Mennonite ChurchUSA

The commitment to and connections within Mennonite Church USA are stronger. Fifty-six percent of pastors said they will “always want to be a member” of Mennonite Church USA compared to 48% of members. Twice as many pastors (35%) served in voluntary service as did members (17%); while three times as many pastors (21% compared to 7% of members) served in an overseas assignment for three months or more.

Anabaptist Identity

In their religious identity, pastors are more likely to define themselves as Mennonite or Anabaptist—84% of pastors compared to 66% of members.

Sixty-one percent of ministers “completely agree” that “nonviolence as a way of living is very important to me,” compared to 40% of members, and 51% of pastors completely agree that it is “wrong for Christians to fight in any war” compared to 32% of members.

Seventy-two percent of pastors “completely disagree” that “the U.S. did the right thing by going to war against Iraq” compared to 46% of members who disagree.

Pastoral Priorities

Pastors and members differ in their understanding of what should be the priorities of pastors. When asked to check the three highest priorities, members most often affirmed preaching sermons (46%) and providing pastoral counseling and care (32%). While pastors also affirm preaching as the highest priority, they also see “shaping the congregation’s vision” (42%) and “equipping members for ministry” (41%) as other top priorities.

Racial/Ethnic Pastors

Mennonite Member Profile 2006 included a small sample of thirty-seven Racial/Ethnic pastors (24% African American, 5% Asian, 5% Native American, 57% Latino/Hispanic, and 5% Other). Some of the findings among these pastors include:

• 72% said their religious beliefs are most important thing in their life
• 44% were baptized in an “other than Mennonite” church
• 89% call themselves “born again”
• 89% believe that the charismatic gifts are genuine gifts of God’s Spirit
• 64% say they will always want to be a part of their denomination
• 71% believe it is very important that leaders and staff of church-related agencies reflect Racial/Ethnic diversity

Conclusion

While these differences between Mennonite ministers and members may come as a surprise to some, they are confirmed by other sociological studies of clergy and members. Undoubtedly, these differences play out in congregational conflicts and in the challenges of providing effective pastoral leadership. However, the differences may be vital and even necessary for effective ministry and congregational growth. Where ministers and members are too much alike, congregations may have difficulty moving beyond the status quo.

While I do not analyze the root causes of the differences between pastors and members here, several factors may play a part in the shaping of pastors:

• Earlier childhood religious and church experiences within which God’s call is felt more deeply.
• More education, particularly higher levels of Mennonite education.
• Stronger connections in the denomination and the broader Mennonite church.
• More service experiences, particularly abroad.
• Deeper encounters with human need and spiritual realities in the context of pastoral care.

Understanding the differences between pastors and members is important. For pastors, clarity about these differences may provide a helpful perspective when working through congregational conflicts and misunderstandings. For members, recognizing and validating their pastor’s distinctives could lead to greater empowerment of pastoral leadership and fulfillment of the congregation’s missional calling—communicating the good news of Jesus Christ across the street and around the world.

Racial/Ethnic Mennonites in the U.S.—Opportunities and Challenges

By Conrad L. Kanagy

In contrast to a number of other denominations with historic European roots, Mennonite Church USA includes a large and rapidly growing number of Racial/Ethnic members and congregations. Racial/Ethnic is a self-designation by groups with members who are African-American, Latino/Hispanic, Native American, Asian and “other than Anglo.”

There are 169 Racial/Ethnic congregations (18% of the denomination) and more than 12,000 members (11% of the denomination) in these congregations. Based on Mennonite Member Profile 2006 findings, I estimate that another 3-4% of Racial/Ethnic members attend predominantly white congregations.

The largest number of Racial/Ethnic congregations are Latino/Hispanic (46%), followed by African American (35%), Asian (11%), and Native American (8%). African American congregations have the largest membership block with 52% of Racial/Ethnic members in the denomination (one-third of these attend a single congregation— Calvary Community Church in Hampton, Va.). Latino/Hispanic congregations are next with 35%, followed by Asian congregations (9%) and Native American congregations (4%).

Demographics

By and large, Racial/Ethnic members are more urban, younger and less affluent than white or Anglo Mennonites:

• More Racial/Ethnic members live in large urban areas, with 39% residing in cities with populations greater than 250,000 compared to just 8% of other Mennonites.

• Racial/Ethnic members are nine years younger (46 years of age) on average than Anglo Mennonites (55 years of age). While the percent of white Mennonites between 18 and 45 years of age is quite low (29%), more than 50% of Racial/Ethnic members are between 18 and 45 years old.

• Racial/Ethnic members are less affluent. In 2005, eighteen percent of Racial/Ethnic households had incomes under $15,000 compared with only 6% of other Mennonites. One-third of Racial/Ethnic households earned under $25,000 compared to 15% of other Mennonites.

• Sixteen percent of Racial/Ethnic members lack health insurance compared to just 4% of white Mennonites without coverage. In the U.S. as a whole, 16% of Americans are not covered by health insurance.

• There are substantial differences in education among Racial/Ethnic groups. Asians are the most highly educated, with 57% having a college degree compared 32% of African Americans, 20% of Latino/Hispanics and 12% of Native Americans. Native Americans are most likely not to have completed high school at 41% followed by Latino/Hispanics at 23%, Asians at 13% and African Americans at 6%.

Political Identity

Racial/Ethnic members are less likely to identify with a political party than other Mennonites, with 27% claiming no political party in contrast to just 11% of Anglos. This difference is in large part due to the immigrant status of many Racial/Ethnic members—38% of immigrants do not identify with a political party compared to 16% among Racial/Ethnic members born in the U.S.

Racial/Ethnic members who do identify with a political party are slightly more likely to be Democrat (32%) than Republican (30%), compared with Anglo Mennonites who are more likely to be Republican (52%) than Democrat (21%).

Witness and Outreach

Racial/Ethnic members are more evangelistic in their witness to the Gospel than are Anglo Mennonites. Sixty-one percent of Racial/Ethnic members speak about their faith to people outside their church several times a month or more compared to 38% of other Mennonites. And twenty-nine percent of Racial Ethnic members regularly (several times a month or more) invite non-Christians to their church compared to 7% of Anglo Mennonites.

The Holy Spirit

Racial/Ethnic members’ understanding of the Holy Spirit as well as experiences with the charismatic gifts of the Spirit distinguish them from other Mennonites. Racial/Ethnic members are more likely to say the charismatic gifts of healing, prophesying and speaking in tongues are “genuine gifts of God’s Spirit,” with 83% of them agreeing compared to 59% of other Mennonites. Seventy percent of Racial/Ethnic members have had personal experience with the charismatic gifts of the Holy Spirit (casting out demons, speaking in tongues, prophesying, healing) compared to 42% of other Mennonites.

Racism

Eighteen percent of Racial/Ethnic members acknowledge they have been unfairly treated because of their race and/or ethnicity by other Mennonites. Not surprisingly, Racial/Ethnic members are more likely than other Mennonites to express concern about racism and to support anti-racism efforts in both the church and society to overcome barriers to equal access and opportunity.

• Fifty percent of Racial/Ethnic members believe it is “very important” that leaders and staff of church-related agencies reflect the Racial/Ethnic diversity of Mennonite congregations. This compares with 26% of Anglo Mennonites.

• Twenty-eight percent of Racial/Ethnic members “strongly support” intentional efforts to hire and promote Racial/Ethnic minorities in the larger society compared to 4% of white Mennonites.

• Thirty-nine percent of Racial/Ethnic members believe it is “very important” that church leaders address issues of race and racism compared to 27% of white Mennonites.

Conclusion

The growing number of Racial/Ethnic members and congregations is perhaps the greatest opportunity and greatest challenge for Mennonite Church USA. The opportunities are related to the following:

• Racial/Ethnic members are more urban than other Mennonites, and offer a model for how to be “Anabaptist in the city”—something that few Mennonites in North America have experienced.

• The younger age of Racial/Ethnic members offers vitality to an aging denomination.

• The experience of the Holy Spirit among Racial/Ethnic members represents a spiritual stream that other Mennonites can benefit from, some who have been hesitant or resistant to diverse expressions of the Spirit.

• The greater evangelical witness of Racial/Ethnic Mennonites is a much needed example of faithfulness in a denomination that has recognized its missional calling but whose members too often lack courage or passion to express in word and deed the good news of Jesus Christ.

• The poverty of some Racial/Ethnic Mennonites should convict more affluent and materially comfortable Anglo Mennonites to share their resources with Racial/Ethnic congregations and to support the efforts of Racial/Ethnic constituency groups.

• Racial/Ethnic Mennonites reveal that evangelical Christianity is not solely the possession of the political right. The combination of a charismatic spirituality, an active evangelical witness and support for social justice may represent a new kind of Anabaptist identity that all Mennonites can learn from.

Unfortunately, there are substantial challenges alongside these opportunities. Several include:

• Many Anglo Mennonites are not aware of the rich racial and ethnic diversity of their denomination.

• It is not clear that Anglo Mennonites fully appreciate the gifts that Racial/Ethnic members and congregations bring to the denomination.

• Anglo Mennonites are less interested in anti-racism efforts than are Racial/Ethnic Mennonites, perhaps because racism has become politicized in the U.S. and anti-racism efforts are more often identified with the political left than the right.

• Social, economic, cultural, geographic, historical, residential and language differences between Anglo and Racial/Ethnic members are too often maintained rather than challenged, and in the process become barriers to the development of meaningful relationships and collaboration across race and ethnicity.