Jumpstarter 7 of 10

Ideas to help restart your discussion

Question 7

Taylor distinguishes “community of charity,” “community of goods,” and “community of production,” calling charity at least “a New Testament… Jesus thing”; what practices in your church life actually test whether you believe that claim, and what would you have to change to keep “community of charity” from becoming sentimental rather than costly?

Another way to ask: Taylor says a “community of charity” is clearly a New Testament, Jesus thing. What habits in your church actually test if you believe that, and what would you need to change so it costs something instead of just sounding nice?

Direct Answer Taylor implies “community of charity” is proven when a brotherhood actually carries burdens—helping in sickness and hardship—not merely affirming generosity in theory; keeping it from sentiment requires concrete, shared sacrifice.

Support from Transcript:

Taylor names three categories: “community of goods,” “community of production” (Hutterites “taking that… furthest”), and Binder’s “community of charity.”
He affirms charity strongly: “I agree with him… I think it’s a mark… of the Anabaptist churches,” and says he’s “very blessed” by encountering it.
He calls it “a New Testament… a Jesus thing,” insisting it must be expressed somehow.
He defines it practically: a brotherhood “come together and help people if they’re going through hard times or their sicknesses.”
He warns: “to lose that is to lose something major,” suggesting it’s not optional or merely emotional.

Discussion Follow-ups What real situations in your church expose whether charity is costly (medical bills, unemployment, meals, time)? If no one feels the cost, is it truly “community” or just kindness?

Jumpstarter 7 of 10

Add your phone number?

Thank you!

Jumpstarter 7 of 10