Apparently Weaver and Zimmerman, along with other Plain people whom they know, have been accused of being Pharisees due to their “conservatism,” a word they often use to describe their Old Order beliefs and practices. Conservatism, by their own definition, is “conserving the standards of Christ” (p. 71).
Plain people believe their hundreds of ordnung rules help them conserve their standards. So conservatism involves keeping all the smallest, detailed requirements of the Plain ordnung. And this is why, the authors claim, people accuse Plain people of being Pharisees, because they, like the Pharisees, keep so many detailed rules. Here is Weaver and Zimmerman’s defense against that accusation:
Jesus never taught or even implied that their [the Pharisees’] fault was conservatism. He clearly taught that it was hypocrisy. And hypocrisy isn’t due to conservatism. It’s due to not being inwardly what one professes outwardly. Anyone who claims to be a Christian but remains carnal within is a Pharisee. It [pharisaism] has nothing to do with conserving the standards of Christ [that is, keeping hundreds of detailed ordnung rules].
Jesus did not criticize the Pharisees for being conservative [keeping hundreds of detailed rules]. He actually encouraged them to keep on being conservative and taking care of small things. The Plain People are called Pharisees because they put so much emphasis on not only obeying Jesus and the church [Note: the authors are saying that obeying Jesus and the church are two different things] in big things, but also in the smallest of things. But Jesus told the Pharisees; “These [weighty matters] ought ye to have done, and not to leave the other [small things] undone” (Matt 23:23). So Jesus actually told the Pharisees that they should have been diligent in the small things, but not while neglecting the big things. …
It is ironic that professing Christians criticize the Plain People and call them Pharisees for putting so much emphasis on small things, when Jesus said that was the one thing the Pharisees were doing right! (pp. 70-71).
Although it is certainly true that Jesus condemned the Pharisees for their hypocrisy in Matthew 23, the authors’ analysis of Matthew 23:23 overlooks the fact that Jesus was not referencing the Pharisees’ man-made “fence laws” (which would be analogous to an ordnung). Rather, He was referring solely to God’s commandments, and specifically to their neglect of His “weighty” commandments and their greater focus on His less weighty commandments. Let’s read it for ourselves:
Woe to you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! For you tithe mint and dill and cummin, and have neglected the weightier provisions of the law: justice and mercy and faithfulness; but these are the things you should have done without neglecting the others. You blind guides, who strain out a gnat and swallow a camel! (Matt. 23:23).
The Law of Moses required the practice of tithing, and the scribes and Pharisees took that requirement seriously, tithing on all their gains, even from their tiniest garden herbs. According to Jesus, however, there were more important commandments in the Mosaic Law that they neglected, commandments that revolved around “justice and mercy and faithfulness.”
Matthew 23:23 says nothing about man-made laws. So when Jesus said, “These are the things you should have done without neglecting the others,” He did not mean, “You should be keeping hundreds of man-made rules that govern every detail of life, plus keeping the more weighty commandments of God.” No, He was saying, “You should be keeping all of God’s commandments, the less weighty and the more weighty ones.”
Therefore, Weaver and Zimmerman’s analysis is misleading, because they equate the Plain ordnung with God’s commandments. Jesus did not commend the scribes and Pharisees for keeping hundreds of man-made rules. He commended them for keeping God’s less weighty commandments, and He found fault with them for neglecting the weightier commandments.
The Burden of the Ordnung
Matthew 23 contains many denunciations of the Pharisees, including some denunciations of their man-made rules: “They tie up heavy burdens and lay them on men’s shoulders, but they themselves are unwilling to move them with so much as a finger” (Matt. 23:4). The heavy burdens are clearly a reference to the Pharisees’ extra-biblical requirements. (Even worse, they didn’t burden themselves with the same rules, something of which I hope no Plain leader is guilty.)
Later in this chapter, Weaver and Zimmerman address Matthew 23:4 specifically:
This verse is sometimes referred to claim that the Plain People also lay heavy burdens on the church with all their rules. However, Jesus’ “commandments are not grievous” (1 John 5:3). All the Plain People’s guidelines are built on the foundation of Jesus’ commandments, and they are not burdensome to those who love Jesus (p. 74).
Those three sentences contain another non sequitur as well as two falsehoods.
It does not logically follow that because Jesus’ commandments are not burdensome, hundreds of additional rules are also not burdensome (even if they have some relationship to Jesus’ commandments). One would actually expect the exact opposite to be true. Any honest Plain person will admit (and many have admitted to me) that following hundreds of ordnung rules is burdensome. How could it be otherwise? If I hired you to accomplish ten specific tasks every day, but then one day I gave you an extra hundred tasks to accomplish, would you not consider those extra tasks burdensome?
The first falsehood in the above-quoted passage is, once again, the referring to hundreds of ordnung rules as “guidelines.” Every time Weaver and Zimmerman use that word to describe Plain ordnungs, they are being dishonest, because ordnung rules are obligatory requirements, the breaking of which is seen as threatening one’s salvation.
The second falsehood is the claim that “all the Plain People’s guidelines are built on the foundation of Jesus’ commandments.” We have already seen that this is not true. It is ironic that just one page after making these false claims, the authors write, “The Plain People…have a widely-known reputation for honesty” (p. 75).
The Disciplining of Ordnung-Violators
Weaver and Zimmerman realize that Plain People are also often accused as being pharisaic for their severe disciplining—which includes excommunication and shunning—of those who violate extra-biblical rules of Plain ordnungs:
Perhaps another reason the Plain People are accused of being like the Pharisees is because they are still willing to discipline erring [adult] children and wayward church members for actions other than the obvious sins spelled out in the Bible. Sometimes discipline is used when a member’s attitude toward church guidelines is hostile.
However, disobedience toward church or parental guidelines is disobedience nonetheless, if those guidelines are not working against God’s truth. As Christ says in Luke 16:10, “He that is faithful in that which is least is faithful also in much: and he that is unjust in the least is unjust also in much.” How then can we say that small acts of disobedience are not worthy of discipline? (p. 76).
Three times in this short passage about disciplining ordnung violators, Weaver and Zimmerman refer to ordnung rules as “guidelines”! At least they are honest in admitting that Plain People do discipline church members “for actions other than the obvious sins spelled out in the Bible.” Yet they act as if, in so doing, they are preserving a biblical practice that other churches have abandoned: “[Plain churches] are still willing to discipline erring children and wayward church members for actions other than the obvious sins spelled out in the Bible.” Still willing? What church, including the apostolic church, ever disciplined church members for actions other than “the obvious sins spelled out in the Bible”?
And what is their defense for this practice? To paraphrase the authors, “Disobedience is disobedience, whether it be against God’s rules or church rules.” In one sense, they are correct here. Rules, especially ones that have no moral basis, must be enforced or they will not be obeyed. If you are going to maintain conformity to the ordnung, you must enforce it by disciplining violators. Many Amish and former Amish people have told me about ordnung rules in their communities that no one obeyed because they were not enforced.
In any case, Weaver and Zimmerman once again twist Scripture to buttress their point that “small acts of disobedience” against extra-biblical rules are “worthy of discipline.” This time they amazingly quote Jesus’ words about the importance of being faithful in “small things,” found at the conclusion of His parable of the unjust steward in Luke 16. However, in that parable Jesus makes no reference to being faithful to man-made rules. Rather, He called his followers to be faithful with the money God has entrusted to us. As He said in applying the parable, “Therefore if you have not been faithful in the use of unrighteous wealth, who will entrust the true riches to you?” (Luke 16:11). More specifically, Jesus wants us to obey God’s commandments regarding caring for the poor. He said two verses earlier that He expects us to use our money to “make friends” so that we will be “welcomed into the eternal dwellings” (Luke 16:9).
Why Swallow Gnats?
But Weaver and Zimmerman are not done with twisting Scripture to justify Plain doctrine. They turn again to Jesus’ sacred words:
When the Plain People discipline the unrepentant attitude in those who look at Biblical guidelines as an inconvenience to be overcome, they are compared to the Pharisees where Christ told them they strain out a gnat but swallow a camel. But why not take care of both the camels and gnats? Should we willingly swallow gnats left and right just because camels are worse? This leads back to a point made earlier; that just because the big problems are more important doesn’t mean the little problems should be ignored. That’s completely missing Jesus’ point (p. 76).
First, once again, Weaver and Zimmerman refer to ordnung rules as “guidelines” even when they are talking about disciplining guideline violators. And they repeat the falsehood that “guidelines” are “biblical.” There is no example in the Bible of spiritual leaders creating hundreds of extra-biblical rules that were enforced by threat of excommunication, shunning and hellfire.
Second, the authors attempt to soften the harsh and bizarre Plain practice of excommunicating and shunning one’s own family members for unrepentant infractions against man-made ordnung rules that have no moral basis—by stating that Plain leaders “discipline the unrepentant attitude in those who look at Biblical guidelines as an inconvenience to overcome” (emphasis mine). The truth, however, is people, not attitudes, are the targets of discipline. And people, not attitudes, suffer the horrific pain of being excommunicated and shunned—for no biblical reason—by their family members.
Third, when Jesus condemned the Pharisees of His day for “straining out gnats and swallowing camels,” He was illustrating their practice of focusing on what was of minor importance and ignoring what was of major importance. Weaver and Zimmerman claim that Plain people focus on both, but the actual evidence leads to a different conclusion.
For example, when a group enforces detailed rules regarding men’s hat brims and women’s cap strings, as well as hundreds of other minor lifestyle regulations, but has no concern for the hundreds of millions of people around the world who have never once heard Jesus’ name, is that group balancing the gnats and camels properly?[9]
And when a group excommunicates and shuns someone for the rest of his life for not repenting of owning a guitar that he uses to worship God, but welcomes a man who has repeatedly sexually molested children (but who always “repents”)—a man whom even the corrupt world understands should spend decades in prison for his perverse and vile crimes—is that group balancing the gnats and camels appropriately?
A Needed Wall?
Ordnungs are absolutely essential, according to Weaver and Zimmerman:
Guidelines are needed if a church is to uphold the rules of Christ.
The church that wishes to obey God and remain unspotted by the world must erect a wall to keep the world out. That wall is their guidelines or Ordnung. While some people see these standards as something to minimize personal freedom, it would be more right to say they are for the sake of minimizing the chance of spiritual destruction. These standards take away many of the options and temptations that lead down the slippery slope to sin. … When a church has no guidelines, its members tend to fall into sin and discord. …
Church standards benefit the members in many ways, including in that they narrow life so that we do not have as many options and therefore not as many things distracting us from pure Christian living.
The more options a Christian has, the more temptations he will face. Therefore the Plain Churches, by ruling out various options, helps its members to not even have many of the temptations that the permissive churches continually are afflicted by.
Only when we are not fully submitted to the standards of our church does the forbidden become a temptation. But a true Christian submits to the church and its leaders, just as the Bible commands. Only by disobeying God can a Christian disobey a church guideline. Even if we believe a guideline is unnecessary, we’d still be disobeying a multitude of Biblical commandments by not submitting, and would undoubtedly have to answer for the purposeful disobedience at the final judgment (pp. 77-78).
Five times in that short passage, the authors once again refer to ordnungs that consist of hundreds of enforced extra-biblical rules as “guidelines,” claiming they are “needed if a church is to uphold the rules of Christ.” The ordnung that Weaver and Zimmerman follow doesn’t seem able to guide them away from using deceptive language to mischaracterize the nature of ordnungs.
If ordnungs are essential to “uphold the rules of Christ,” why didn’t Jesus Himself teach His followers not only His commandments, but also hundreds of additional ordnung rules that would help them uphold His commandments? Why didn’t the apostles do the same? Why haven’t most churches over the past 2,000 years done this? Are Plain churches the only churches that have ever fully “upheld the rules of Christ”?
Regarding the authors’ point that ordnung standards “take away many of the options and temptations that lead down the slippery slope to sin,” that is no doubt true. Of course, if you really want to control people’s behavior, prison is the best place to do that. No one ever robbed a bank from prison. If you put prisoners in solitary confinement, you can keep them from punching fellow prisoners. If you tape their mouths shut, you can keep them from using curse words. There is no end to how “holy” you can force people to be; all you need is enough restraint.
Notice that the word “holy” in my last sentence was in quotation marks. That is because imposed holiness is not holiness at all. It is coercion. No one finds any virtue in prison inmates who manage not to rob banks while in prison. Similarly, God finds no virtue in Plain people who do what is right only because they have no option to do wrong.
God has placed all of us in an environment that includes temptation. Starting in the Garden of Eden, He has allowed the devil to tempt people (but with limitations). Free moral agents must be tested. Thus the reason for the “forbidden fruit.”
According to 1 Corinthians 10:13, God will never allow His children to be tempted beyond what they are able, but with the temptation He will provide the way of escape also, so that they will be able to endure it. That is a Spirit-inspired promise. Church leaders who believe that they must limit their church members’ temptations by means of hundreds of enforced extra-biblical rules don’t believe that promise.
Of course, those who are not born again are not God’s children, and they don’t have the Holy Spirit living in them to empower them to be holy. And that may be why Plain leaders have to resort to ordnungs to get Plain church members to display the outward appearance of holiness. That may also be why Weaver and Zimmerman believe that without ordnung rules, Plain church members will stray. Perhaps they have been driving herds of goats rather than leading flocks of sheep?
Astonishingly, as we already read, Weaver and Zimmerman declare that to disobey any ordnung rule of the church is to disobey God:
A true Christian submits to the church and its leaders, just as the Bible commands. Only by disobeying God can a Christian disregard a church guideline. Even if we believe a guideline is unnecessary, we’d still be disobeying a multitude of Biblical commandments by not submitting, and would undoubtedly have to answer for the purposeful disobedience at the final judgment (p. 78).
According to this passage, God will judge Plain people not only on the basis of His commandments but also on the basis of hundreds of ordnung rules, because Christians are supposed to submit to their leaders who make those rules. Plain men will stand before God and give an account for the width of their hat brims! Plain women will stand before God and give an account for their obedient use of straight pins to fasten their dresses! And every Plain person will be judged by God for hundreds of other man-made rules. Heaven or hell hinges on hat widths and straight pins?
Another Justification for Ordnungs: Avoiding “Slippery Slopes”
“It could lead to other things” is the rationale Plain leaders often use to explain why harmless things are prohibited by the ordnung. Weaver and Zimmerman also resort to that explanation:
Let’s take, for example, putting electricity in our houses. This may seem harmless if it were only used to run devices such as a stove. However, it opens up a whole world of electrical technology that is by no means harmless.
The nonconformed [Plain] church must have a stopping point in everything, for without one they would stop nothing short of worldliness (p. 80).
That second paragraph, which sounds like an oft-repeated Plain cliché, is another insulting commentary on Plain people by Plain leaders. Plain people apparently cannot be trusted to set personal “stopping points.” Unless the leaders set stopping points for them, the average Plain person will “stop nothing short of worldliness”—transgressing both God’s commandments and church rules.
If that is actually true (and I hope it is not), it reveals two things: (1) No Plain person apparently loves Jesus, because Jesus said, “If you love Me, you will keep My commandments” (John 14:15). People who love Jesus set “stopping points” according to their understanding of His commandments. (2) No Plain person is actually born again, because being born again sets people free from slavery to sin and empowers them to live holy lives. As John wrote, “No one who is born of God practices sin, because His seed abides in him; and he cannot sin, because he is born of God” (1 John 3:9).
The New Testament teaches, “Law is not made for a righteous person, but for those who are lawless and rebellious, for the ungodly and sinners, for the unholy and profane” (1 Tim. 1:9). Laws are needed to restrain those who need restraint. But righteous people don’t need laws to restrain them, because they are motivated from their good hearts to do what is right. For example, even if there were no laws prohibiting murder, righteous people would never murder anyone.
If Plain people do not actually love Jesus and are not born again, all that an ordnung can do for them is to cover them with a thin veneer of outward, public conformity. But on the inside, the Pharisee still lives. Such folks are “like whitewashed tombs which on the outside appear beautiful, but inside they are full of dead men’s bones” (Matt. 23:27).
To prohibit an adult from having home electricity because he might use it for something evil is to treat him like a child who lacks any self-restraint. Hundreds of millions of devoted followers of Christ have electricity in their homes without using it for evil purposes. As I write these words, I’m sitting on an electric heating pad for warmth on a cold winter day. I’m drinking a cup of coffee that was brewed using electricity. I’m typing these words on an electrically powered laptop computer by the light of an electric lamp. And I am involved in many other virtuous projects in which electricity plays a part.
I am so thankful for the blessing of electricity, something created by God for both heaven and earth: “Out from [His] throne come flashes of lightning and sounds and peals of thunder” (Rev. 4:5, emphasis added). Every God-made atom on earth contains positively charged protons and negatively charged electrons. Beyond these things, our brains convey signals to every cell in our bodies by means of electrical and chemical signals, sometimes firing several hundred nerve impulses in a second. God has “wired” us all!
The electricity that flows through our nerves to activate muscles can be used for good or evil, depending on our choices. It can help us tell lies or truth with our mouths. The Creator, of course, designed us with that capacity. Can we learn anything from His example? If Plain leaders could ever figure out a way to ban the God-given electricity in our bodies, they might finally succeed in keeping church members from sinning! But they would also prevent them from doing any good as well. They would all suffer from Plain paralysis.
Humans have used their electrically wired brains and bodies to harness and utilize, in a small way, the electricity God created in the natural world, to the great benefit of people all over the globe. There is no biblical reason to live in a house without electricity. There is, however, biblical reason to avoid using electricity for evil.
Ordnung Unity?
Yet another justification for church ordnungs offered by Weaver and Zimmerman is their alleged unifying power:
Church standards are also necessary for unity, because without them there would be major differences among the members that would lead to disunity and confusion. Standards take away some of the confusion of how to dress, what to use and own, enabling the church to be unified (p. 80).
But the exact opposite is true. Ordnungs cause disharmony, as demonstrated by (1) every Plain person who relocates to a different community to find a more suitable ordnung; (2) all the disagreements, spoken and unspoken, regarding ordnung rules within Plain communities; (3) all the secret disobedience to the ordnung within Plain communities; (4) all the formerly Plain people who have been excommunicated because of ordnung infractions; and (5) all the division between Plain communities across North America. All that division is because of ordnungs. The Amish denomination, in fact, began because of ordnung disagreements with the Swiss Brethren.
There have been many divisions among the Amish since then. In the second half of the 19th century, they divided into Old Order and Amish Mennonites, the latter of whom eventually joined Mennonite groups. Today there are three main Amish subgroups, with significant differences between their ordnungs: Old Order, New Order and Beachy. And there are at least 60 smaller sub-groups. I live within a 30-minute drive of three Old Order communities, and none of them fellowship with each other. In fact, the second one is a split from the first one, and the third is a split from the second one. All the splits were over ordnung issues.
New Testament Christian unity is based on a common love for the Lord Jesus Christ and for everyone who believes in Him. That love is tolerant of other believers who hold to different convictions on nonessentials. That love is “patient” and “bears all things” (1 Cor. 13:4, 7). Paul called that love “the perfect bond of unity” (Col. 3:14). Love attracts, whereas ordnungs repel. Think about it!
[9] Later in Why Be Plain? Weaver and Zimmerman spend almost an entire chapter defending why Plain churches ignore Jesus’ Great Commission.
