The Anabaptist Vision by Harold S.
Bender.
In this sermon, Harold S.
Bender focuses on the essence of the Anabaptist Vision as it came to life
during the latter part of the Reformation.
Starting around the year 1525, historians have frequently named this
latter part of the Reformation as the Radical Reformation because of its
emphasis of wanting to return to the roots of ancient Christianity.
In this message, Bender identifies the Anabaptist view of salvation, the radical
idea of separation of church and state, and also the revolutionary new view of
church life as a brotherhood.
Speaking of their view of salvation, Bender says that in short, the Anabaptist
Vision could simply be summed up as followers of Christ.
He notably states that while the Anabaptists fully recognized that their
salvation was obtained and maintained by grace through faith, they were
nevertheless convinced that a real salvation must produce real Christ-like
followers.
The idea of claiming a faith that exists only in creeds, professions,
proclamations, or even sacrament without a changed life was seen to the early
Anabaptists as deficient, heretical, even scandalous.
In speaking of the church and the world, Bender states that the early Anabaptists
practiced a radical sense of separation from the world, and while they went on
living within the general population, nevertheless their idea of separation
affected every part of their lives.
Particularly, the idea of being called out of the world and into an assembly of
believers drastically affected the way they viewed the nature of the church.
The Reformers were teaching that the church was established by the state,
based on a population area, and that the true church was an invisible number known
only to God.
The Anabaptists challenged this and said that the church was made up only of truly
born-again saints, and even welcomed constructive church discipline to maintain
this dynamic.
In both these concepts of salvation and church fellowship, Bender utilizes the
word discipleship.
By this, Bender does not mean the modern-day empty practice of trying to
drag unregenerated men through empty prayers, baptisms, and endless teaching,
as we struggle with them all of their life.
Not at all.
Such empty discipleship the Anabaptists saw as a waste of time.
As a matter of fact, one prominent early Anabaptist leader, Menno Simons,
put it this way, he said,
And then in another place,
No, the word discipleship, for the early Anabaptists, was not an empty word.
They took it as Jesus used it when he said,
Bender tells us that this concept of discipleship, as following Christ,
was the key note in Anabaptist theology.
Bender clearly documents that as the Anabaptists of the Radical Reformation
grew, they found that they were more and more at odds with both the original
Reformers and the Catholics.
Making a point about their differences, recently I found a letter from an early
Anabaptist leader, Michael Sattler.
Pointedly, he cautioned his readers that they must beware of the scribes and the
Pharisees.
He labeled the evangelicals of his day who held a faith only visible in books,
creeds, and empty professions as being equivalent to the Old Testament scribes.
Contrawise, he said that those who seek salvation by performing empty works
without faith as equivalent to the Old Testament Pharisees.
The early Anabaptists endeavored to traverse the narrow path between these two
diversions, both the scribes and the Pharisees.
By doing this, the early Anabaptists found enemies in two camps, and ultimately many
lost their lives in both.
Finally, Bender convincingly argues that the Anabaptists of the Radical Reformation
were actually the fulfillment of the visions and dreams of the early Reformers,
those such as Luther and Zwingli.
He demonstrates that the original vision of the Reformers came to fruition in a
church established not by the state, not by force, but on faith and lived out
in reality.
Bender offered this radical, literal, simple, and Christ-following manifesto to
a church of his day at a time when the alternatives were becoming conspicuously
deficient.
Radical Reformation Books offers his message to the church today, over 50 years
later, at a time that we believe to be no better.
Our prayer is that we will get it this time.
The message which you are about to hear was given as a presidential address before
the American Society of Church History at Columbia University in 1943.
Bender was just made their president and this was his inaugural address.
He begins the sermon somewhat academically, just keep in mind who his
audience was.
Some of his most significant points are near the latter part of the message.
The Anabaptist Vision by Harold S.
Bender, copyright by Church History 1944, used by permission.
Starting with a quote from the historian Rufus M.
Jones about the Anabaptists, Bender begins, Judged by the reception it met at
the hands of those in power, both in church and state, equally in Roman
Catholic and in Protestant countries, the Anabaptist movement was one of the
most tragic in the history of Christianity.
But, judged by the principles which were put into play by the man who bore this
reproachful nickname, it must be pronounced one of the most momentous and
significant undertakings in man's eventful religious struggle after the truth.
It gathered up the gains of earlier movement.
It is the spiritual soil out of which all nonconformist sects have sprung and it is
the first plain announcement in modern history of a program for a new type of
Christian society, which the modern world, especially in America and England,
has been slowly realizing, an absolutely free and independent religious society and
a state in which every man counts as a man and has a share in shaping both church and
state." These words of Rufus M.
Jones constitute one of the best characterizations of Anabaptism and its
contribution to our modern Christian culture to be found in the English
language.
They were brave words when they were written 35 years ago, but they have been
abundantly verified by a generation of Anabaptist research since that time.
There can be no question but that the great principles of freedom of conscience,
separation of church and state, and voluntarism in religion so basic in
American Protestantism and so essential to democracy ultimately are derived from the
Anabaptists of the Reformation period, who for the first time clearly enunciated
them and challenged the Christian world to follow them in practice.
The line of descent through the centuries since that time may not always be clear
and may have passed through other intermediate movements and groups,
but the debt to original Anabaptism is unquestioned.
The 16th century reformers understood the Anabaptist position on this point all too
well and deliberately rejected it.
The best witness is Heinrich Bollinger, Zwingli's successor in Zurich,
whose active lifespan covers the first 50 years of the history of the Swiss
Anabaptists and who knew them so well that he published two extensive treatises
against them in 1531 and 1561.
According to Bollinger, the Swiss Brethren taught this, quoting from his source,
It is wrong to compel anyone by force or coercion to embrace the faith or to put to
death anyone for the sake of his erring faith.
It is an error that in the church any sword other than that of the divine word
should be used.
The secular kingdom should be separated from the church and no secular ruler
should exercise authority in the church.
The Lord has commanded it simply to preach the gospel, not to compel anyone by force
to accept it.
The true church of Christ has a characteristic that it suffers and endures
persecution but does not inflict persecution upon anyone." But great as is
the Anabaptist contribution to the development of religious liberty,
this concept not only does not exhaust but actually fails to divine the true essence
of Anabaptism.
In the last analysis, freedom of religion is a purely formal concept, barren of its
content.
It says nothing about the faith or the way of life of those who advocate it,
nor does it reveal their goals or program of action.
And Anabaptism had not only clearly defined goals but also an action program
of definiteness and power.
In fact, the more intimately one becomes acquainted with this group, the more one
becomes conscious of the great vision that shaped their course in history and for
which they gladly gave their lives.
Before describing this vision, it is well to note its attractiveness to
the masses of Christians of the 16th century.
Sebastian Frank himself an opponent wrote in 1531 scarcely seven years after the
rise of this movement in Zurich.
This is his quote,
In the same year, Bullinger wrote that,
Another contemporary writer asserts that,
Zwingli was so frightened by the power of the movement that he complained that the
struggle with the Catholic party was but child's play compared to the conflict with
the Anabaptists.
The dreadful severity of the persecution of the Anabaptist movement in the years
1527 to 1560, not only in Switzerland, South Germany and Thuringia, but in all
the Austrian lands as well as the Low Countries testifies to the power of the
movement and the desperate haste with which Catholic, Lutheran and Zwingli
authorities alike strove to throttle it before it should be too late.
The notorious decree issued in 1529 by the Diet of Speers, the same Diet which
protested the restriction of evangelical liberties, summarily passed the sentence
of death upon all Anabaptists ordering that,
Repeatedly in subsequent sessions of the Imperial Diet, this decree was re-invoked
and intensified and as late as 1551, the Diet of Augsburg issued a decree
ordering that judges and jurors who had scruples against pronouncing the death
sentence on Anabaptists be removed from office and punished by heavy fines and
imprisonment.
The authorities had great difficulties in executing their program of suppression,
for they soon discovered that the Anabaptists feared neither torture nor
death and gladly sealed their faith with their blood.
In fact, the joyful testimony of the Anabaptist martyrs was a great stimulus to
new recruits for it stirred the imagination of the populace as nothing
else could have done.
Finding, therefore, that the customary method of individual trials and sentences
was proving totally inadequate to stem the tide, the authorities resorted to the
desperate expedient of sending out through the land companies of armed executioners
and mounted soldiers to hunt down the Anabaptists and kill them on the spot,
singly or en masse, without trial or sentence.
The most atrocious application of this policy was made in Swabia, where the
original 400 special police of 1528 sent against the Anabaptists proved too small a
force and had to be increased to 1,000.
An imperial provost marshal, Berthold Eichelle, served as chief administrator of
this bloody program in Swabia and other regions until he finally broke down in
terror and dismay, and after an execution at Brixen, lifted his hand to heaven and
swore a solemn oath never again to put to death an Anabaptist, which vow he kept.
The Count of Alcy and the Palatinate, after 350 Anabaptists had been executed
there, was heard to exclaim, What shall I do?
The more I kill, the greater becomes their number.
The extensive persecution and martyrdom of the Anabaptists testify not only of the
great extent of the movement, but also of the power of the vision that burned within
them.
This is most effectively presented in a moving account written in 1542 and taken
from the ancient Hutterian Chronicles, where it is found at the close of a report
of 2,173 brethren and sisters who gave their lives for their faith.
And here's that report, quoting straight from that document.
No human being was able to take away out of their heart what they had experienced.
Such zealous lovers of God were they.
The fire of God burned within them.
They would die the bitterest death, yea, they would die ten deaths,
rather than forsake the divine truth which they had espoused.
They had drunk of the waters which had flowed from God's sanctuary, yea,
the water of life.
They realized that God helped them to bear the cross and to overcome the bitterness
of death.
The fire of God burned within them.
Their tent they had pitched, not here upon earth, but in eternity.
And of their faith they had a foundation and assurance.
Their faith blossomed as a lily, their loyalty as a rose, their piety and
sincerity as the flower of the garden of God.
The angel of the Lord battled for them that they could not be deprived of the
helmet of salvation.
Therefore they bore all torture and agony without fear.
The things of this world they counted in their holy minds only as shadows,
having the assurance of greater things.
They were so drawn unto God that they knew nothing, sought nothing, desired nothing,
loved nothing but God alone.
Therefore they had more patience in their suffering than their enemies in tormenting
them.
Continuing with the quote, the persecutors thought they could dampen and extinguish
the fire of God.
But the prisoners sang in their prisons and rejoiced so that the enemies outside
became much more fearful than the prisoners and did not know what to do with
them.
Many were talked to in wonderful ways, often day and night.
They were argued with, with great cunning and cleverness, with many sweet and smooth
words by monks and priests, by doctors of theology with much false testimony,
with threats and scoldings and mockery, with lies and grievous slander against the
brotherhood.
But none of these things moved them or made them falter.
From the shedding of such innocent blood arose Christians everywhere, brothers all,
for all these persecutions did not take place without fruit.
Perhaps this interpretation of the Anabaptist spirit should be discounted as
too glowing, coming as it does from the group itself.
But certainly it is nearer to the truth than the typical harsh 19th century
interpretation of the movement, which is well represented by the opening
sentence of Ursula, the notable historical novel on the Anabaptists, published in
1878 by the Swiss Gottfried Keller, next to Goethe, perhaps the greatest of
all writers in the German language.
And here's the quote from the beginning of that book, Times of religious change are
like times when the mountains open up.
For then not only do all the marvelous creatures of the human spirit come forth,
the great golden dragons, magic beings and crystal spirits, but there also comes to
light all the hateful vermin of humanity, the host of rats and mice and pestiferous
creations.
And so it was at the time of the Reformation in the northeast part of
Switzerland." Before defining the Anabaptist vision, it is essential to
state clearly what is meant by the term Anabaptist.
Since the name has come to be used in modern historiography to cover a wide
variety of Reformation groups, sometimes thought of as the whole,
quote, left wing of the Reformation, as Roland Baten said, or the Bolsheviks of
the Reformation, as Preserve Smith said.
Although the defense definitive history of Anabaptism has not yet been written,
we know enough today to draw a clear line of demarcation between original
evangelical and constructive Anabaptism on the one hand, which was born in the bosom
of Zwinglianism in Zurich, Switzerland in 1525 and established in the Low Countries
in 1533, and the various mystical, spiritual, revolutionary or even
antinomian related and unrelated groups on the other hand, which came and went like
the flowers of the field in those days of great renovation.
The former, Anabaptism proper, maintained an unbroken course in
Switzerland, South Germany, Austria and Holland throughout the 16th century and
has continued until the present day in the Mennonite movement now in 1944,
almost 500,000 baptized members strong in Europe and America.
There is no longer any excuse for permitting our understanding of the
distinct character of this genuine Anabaptism to be obscured by Thomas
Müntzer, by the peasant wars, the Munzerites or any other aberration of
Protestantism in the 16th century.
There may be some excuse, however, for a failure on the part of the
uninformed student to see clearly what the Anabaptist vision was, because of the
varying interpretation placed upon the movement even by those who mean to
appreciate and approve it.
There is, for instance, the socialist writer, led by Kautsky, who would make
Anabaptism either, quote, the forerunner of the modern socialism, end quote,
or the culminating effort of medieval communism, and who in reality see it only
as an external religious shell of a class movement.
There are the sociologists with their partial socio-economic determinism as
reflected in Richard Niebuhr's approach to the social origin of religious
denominations.
There is Albrecht Reichel, who sees the Anabaptists as an ascetic semi-monastic
continuation of the medieval Franciscan Tertiaries, and locates the 17th century
Pietists with the same line.
And Ludwig Keller, who finds Anabaptists throughout the pre-reformation period in
the guise of Waldenses and other similar groups, whom he chooses to call,
quote, the old evangelical brotherhoods, and for whom he posits a continuity from
earliest times.
Related to Keller are the early Baptist historians and certain Mennonites who
rejoice to find in the Anabaptists the missing link which keeps them in the
apostolic succession of the true church back through the Waldensians, the
Bogomils, the Cathari, the Peliscians, the Donatists, to Pentecost.
But more recently, there is Rufus M.
Jones, who is inclined to class the Anabaptists with the mystics, and Walter
Kohler, who finds an Erasmian humanist origin for them.
However, there is another line of interpretation, now almost 100 years old,
which is being increasingly accepted and which is probably destined to dominate the
field.
It is the one which holds that Anabaptism is the culminating of the Reformation,
the fulfillment of the original vision of Lutheran's wingly, and thus makes it a
consistent evangelical Protestantism, seeking to recreate without compromise the
original New Testament church, the vision of Christ and the apostles.
This line of interpretation begins in 1848 with Max Gible's work on the church in the
Rhine there.
It also goes on to see a Cornelius in his work, following in his work of men like
Johan Loserth, Carl Rembert, and John Horsch, and is represented by such
contemporaries as Ernest Corral of Washington and Fritz Blank of Zurich.
A quotation from Gible may serve to illustrate this interpretation.
Here's his quote.
The essential and distinguishing characteristic of this church is its great
emphasis on the actual personal conversion and regeneration of every Christian
through the Holy Spirit.
They aim with special emphasis at carrying out and realizing the Christian doctrine
and faith in the heart and life of every Christian in the whole Christian church.
Their aim was the bringing together of all the true believers out of the great
degenerated national churches into a true Christian church.
That which the Reformation originally intended to accomplish, they aimed to
bring into full immediate realization.
End quote.
And Johan Loserth says, quote, More radically than any other party for
church reformation, the Anabaptists strove to follow the footsteps of the church of
the first century and to renew unadulterated original Christianity.
End quote.
The evidence in support of this interpretation is overwhelming and could
be taken from the statements of the contemporary opponents of the Anabaptists
as well as from the Anabaptists themselves.
Conrad Grebel, the founder of the Swiss Brethren Movement, states clearly this
point of view in his letter to Thomas Münzer of 1524 in words written on behalf
of the entire group, which constitute in effect the original Anabaptist
pronunciamento.
And here's his quote.
Just as our forebears, the Roman Catholic papal church, fell away from the true God
and the knowledge of Jesus Christ and of the right faith in him, and from the one
true common divine word, from the divine institution, from Christian love and life,
and lived without God's law and gospel and human, useless, unchristian customs and
ceremonies, and expected to attain salvation therein, yet fell far short of
it, as the evangelical preachers, such as Luther and Zwingli, etc.,
have declared, and to some extent are still declaring, so today, too,
every man wants to be saved by superficial faith, without fruits of faith,
without the baptism of test and probation, without love and hope, without right
Christian practices, and wants to persist in all the old fashions of personal vices,
and in common ritualistic and anti-Christian customs of baptism and the
Lord's Supper, in disrespect for the divine word, and in respect for the word
of the Pope and the anti-papal preachers, which yet is not equal to the divine word,
nor in harmony with it, in respecting persons, and in manifold seductions there
is grosser and more pernicious error now than ever has been since the beginning of
the world.
In the same error, too, we lingered as long as we heard and read only the
evangelical preachers who are to blame for all this and punishment for our sins.
But after we took the Scriptures in hand, too, we consulted it on many points,
we have been instructed somewhat and have discovered the great and hurtful error of
the shepherds, of ours, too, namely that we do not daily beseech God earnestly with
constant groanings to be brought out of this destruction of all godly life and of
human abominations and to attain to true faith and divine instruction." A similar
statement was made in 1538 after 14 years of persecution by an Anabaptist leader who
spoke on behalf of his group and the great colloquy of Bern with the leaders of the
Reformed Church.
Here's his quote.
While yet in the National Church we obtain much instruction from the writings of
Luther, Zwingli, and others concerning the Mass and other papal ceremonies,
that they are vain.
Yet we recognize a great lack as regard repentance, conversion, and the true
Christian life.
Upon these things my mind was bent.
I waited and hoped for a year or two since the ministers had much to say of amendment
of life, of giving to the poor, loving one another, and abstaining from
evil.
But I could not close my eyes to the fact that the doctrine which was preached and
which was based on the Word of God was not carried out.
No beginning was made toward true Christian living and there was no unison
in the teaching concerning the things that were necessary.
And although the Mass and the images were finally abolished, true repentance and
Christian love were not in evidence.
Changes were made only as concern external things.
This gave me occasion to inquire further into these matters.
Then God sent His messengers, Conrad Grebel and others, whom which I conferred
about the fundamental teachings of the apostles and the Christian life and
practice.
I found them men who had surrendered themselves to the doctrine of Christ by
busfetigate, repentance evidenced by fruits.
With their assistance we established a congregation in which repentance was in
evidence by newness of life in Christ.
It is evident from these statements that the Anabaptists were concerned most of all
about, quote, a true Christian life.
That is, a life patterned after the teaching and examples of Christ.
The Reformers, they believed, whatever their profession may have been,
did not secure among the people true repentance, regeneration, and Christian
living as a result of their preaching.
The Reformation emphasis on faith was good, but inadequate, for without newness
of life, they held faith is hypocritical.
This Anabaptist critique of the Reformation was a sharp one, but it was
not unfair.
There is abundant evidence that although the original goal sought by Luther and
Zwingli was, quote, an earnest Christianity for all, the actual outcome
was far less.
For the level of Christian living among the Protestant population was frequently
lower than it had been before under Catholicism.
Luther himself was keenly conscious of this deficiency.
In April 1522, he expressed the hope that, quote, we who at the present are well nigh
heathen under a Christian name may yet organize a Christian assembly,
end quote.
In December of 1525, he had an important conversation with Caspar Schwenkfeld
concerning the establishment of the New Testament church.
Schwenkfeld pointed out that the establishment of the new church had failed
to result in spiritual and moral betterment of the people, a fact which
Luther admitted.
For Schwenkfeld states that, quote, Luther regretted very much that no
amendment of life was in evidence, end quote.
Between 1522 and 1527, Luther repeatedly mentioned his concern to establish a true
Christian church and his desire to provide for earnest Christians, die mit ernst
Christian zu wollen, who would confess the gospel with their lives as well as with
their tongues.
He thought of entering the names of these earnest Christians in a special book and
having them meet separately from the mass of nominal Christians, but concluding that
he would not have sufficient of such people, he dropped the plan.
Zwingli faced the same problem.
He was in fact specifically challenged by the Swiss brethren to set up such a
church, but he refused and followed Luther's course.
Both reformers decided that it was better to include the masses within the fold of
the church than to form a fellowship of true Christians only.
Both certainly expected the preaching of the word and the ministration of the
sacraments to bear fruit in an earnest Christian life, at least among some,
but they reckoned with a permanent and largely indifferent mass.
And taking this course, said the Anabaptists, the reformers surrendered
their original purpose and abandoned the divine intention.
Others may say that they were wise and statesmanlike leaders.
The Anabaptists, however, retained the original vision of Lutheran Zwingli,
enlarged it, gave it body and form, and set out to achieve it in actual
experience.
They proceeded to organize a church composed solely of earnest Christians and
actually found the people for it.
They did not believe in any case that the size of their response to determine
whether or not the truth of God should be applied, and they refused to compromise.
They preferred to make a radical break with the 1500 years of history and
culture, if necessary, rather than to break with the New Testament.
May it not be said that the decision of Lutheran Zwingli to surrender their
original vision was the tragic turning point of the Reformation?
Professor Carl Mueller, one of the keenest and fairest interpreters of the
Reformation, evidently thinks so, for he says, quote, The aggressive,
conquering power which Lutheranism manifested in its first period was lost
everywhere at the moment when the governments took matter in hands and
established the Lutheran creed, end quote.
That is to say, when Luther's mass church concept was put into practice.
Luther, in his latter years, expressed disappointment at the final outcome of the
Reformation, setting that the people had become more and more indifferent towards
religion and the moral outlook was more deplorable than ever.
His last years were embittered by the consciousness of partial failure and his
expression of dejection are well known.
Contrast this sense of defeat at the end of Luther's outward successful career with
a sense of victory in the hearts of the Anabaptist martyrs who laid down their
lives in what the world would call defeat, conscious of having kept faith with their
vision to the end.
Having defined genuine Anabaptism in its Reformation setting, we are ready to
examine its central teachings.
The Anabaptist vision included three major points of emphasis.
First, a new conception of the essence of Christianity as discipleship.
Secondly, a new conception of the church as a brotherhood.
And third, a new ethic of love and non-resistance.
We turn now to an exposition of these three points.
First, and fundamental in the Anabaptist vision, was the conception of the essence
of Christianity as discipleship.
It was a concept which meant the transformation of the entire way of life
of the individual believer and the society so that it should be fashioned after the
teachings and example of Christ.
The Anabaptists could not understand a Christianity which made regeneration,
holiness, and love primarily a matter of intellect, of doctrinal belief,
or of subjective experience rather than one of the transformation of life.
They demanded an outward expression of the inward experience.
Repentance must be evidence by newness of behavior.
In evidence is the keynote which rings through the testimonies and challenges of
the early Swiss brethren when they are called to give an account of themselves.
The whole life was to be brought literally under the lordship of Christ in a covenant
of discipleship, a covenant which the Anabaptist writers delighted to emphasize.
The focus of the Christian life was to be not so much an inward experience of the
grace of God as it was for Luther, but the outward application of that grace
to all human conduct and the consequent Christianization of all human
relationship.
The true test of the Christian, they held, is discipleship.
The great word of the Anabaptist was not faith as it was for the Reformers,
but following, nachvolle Christi, following of Christ.
And baptism, the greatest of the Christian symbol, was accordingly to be for them the
covenant of a good conscience towards God, the pledge of a complete commitment to
obey Christ and not primarily the symbol of a past experience.
The Anabaptists had faith indeed, but they used it to produce a life.
Theology was for them a means, not an end.
That the Anabaptists not only proclaimed the idea of full Christian discipleship,
but achieved in the eyes of their contemporaries and even of their opponents
a measurably higher level of performance than the average is fully witnessed by the
sources.
The early Swiss and German Reformers were keenly aware of this achievement and its
attractive power.
Zwingli knew it best of all, but Bollinger, Capito, Vadian, and many other
confirmed his judgment that the Anabaptist brethren were unusually sincere,
devoted, and effective Christians.
However, since the brethren refused to accept the state church system which the
Reformers were building, in addition made radical demands which might have changed
the entire social order, the leaders of the Reformation were completely baffled in
their understanding of the movement and professed to believe that the Anabaptists
were hypocrites of the darkest dye.
Bollinger, for instance, calls them, quote,
Nevertheless, they had to admit the apparent superiority of their life.
In Zwingli's last book against the Swiss brethren in 1527, for instance,
the following is found, quoting from Zwingli,
End quote.
Bollinger himself, who wrote bitter diatribes against them, was compelled to
admit of the early Swiss brethren that, quoting from Bollinger,
End quote.
Bollinger's lament that, quote,
End quote.
Had been reported earlier.
End quote.
Capito, the Reformer of Strasbourg, wrote in 1527 concerning the Swiss
brethren, quoting from him,
End quote.
admitted in a letter to the Council of Bern in 1532, that, quoting,
End quote.
Walter Klerer, the Reformed chronicler of Appelsen, Switzerland, wrote this,
End quote.
And the Roman Catholic theologian, Franz Agricola, in his book of 1582,
against the terrible errors of the Anabaptists, says this,
Deception, swearing, strife, harsh language, no intemperate eating and
drinking, no outward personal display is found among them, but humility,
patience, uprightness, neatness, honesty, temperance, straightforwardness,
in such measure that one would suppose that they have the Holy Spirit of God.
End quote.
A mandate against the Swiss brethren, published in 1585 by the Council of Bern,
states that offensive sins and vices were common among the preachers and the
memberships of the Reformed church, adding,
End quote.
One of the finest contemporary characterizations of the Anabaptists is
given in 1531 by Sebastian Frank, an objective and sympathetic witness,
though an opponent of the Anabaptists, who wrote the following,
They break bread with one another as an evidence of unity and love.
They helped each other faithfully and called each other brothers.
They died as martyrs, patiently and humbly, enduring all persecution.
End quote.
A further confirmation of the above evaluation of the achievement of the
Anabaptists is found in the fact that in many places, those who lived a consistent
Christian life were in danger of falling under the suspicion of being guilty of
Anabaptist heresy.
Caspar Schwenkfeld, for instance, declares, I am being maligned by both
preachers and others with the charge of being an Anabaptist, even as all others
who lead a true, pious Christian life are now almost everywhere given this name.
End quote.
Bullinger himself complained that,
and consequently called or misnamed Anabaptists by petulant persons.
End quote.
The great collection of Anabaptist sources materials, commonly called the Teufer
files, now in the third volume, contains a number of specific
illustrations of this.
In 1562, a certain Caspar Seicher of Württemberg was accused of being an
Anabaptist, but the court records reports that since he was an envious man who could
not get along with others and who often started quarrels, as well as being guilty
of swearing and cursing and carrying a weapon, he was not considered to be an
Anabaptist.
On the other hand, in 1570, a certain Hans Jaeger in Württemberg was brought before
the court on suspicion of being an Anabaptist, primarily because he did not
curse, but lived an irreproachable life.
As a second major element in the Anabaptist vision, a new concept of the
church was created by the central principle of newness of life and applied
Christianity.
Voluntary church membership based upon true conversion and involving a commitment
to holy living and discipleship was the absolutely essential heart of this
concept.
This vision stands in sharp contrast to the church concept of the reformers who
retained the medieval idea of a mass church with memberships of the entire
population from birth to the grave compulsory by law and force.
It is from the standpoint of this new conception of the church that the
Anabaptist opposition to infant baptism must be interpreted.
Infant baptism was not the cause of their disavowal of the state church.
It was only a symbol of the cause.
How could infants give their commitment based upon a knowledge of what true
Christianity means?
They might conceivably, passively experience the grace of God, though
Anabaptists would question this, but they could not respond in pledging
their lives to Christ.
Such infant baptism would not only be meaningless, but would in fact become a
serious obstacle to a true understanding of the nature of Christianity and
membership in the church.
Only adult baptism could signify an intelligent life commitment.
An inevitable corollary of the concept of the church as a body of committed and
practicing Christian pledged to the highest standards of New Testament living
was the insistence of the separation of the church from the world.
That is, non-conformity of the Christian to the worldly way of life.
The world would not tolerate the practice of true Christian principles in society,
and the church could not tolerate the practice of worldly ways among its
membership.
Hence, the only way out was separation, absonderung.
The gathering of true Christians into their own Christian society where Christ's
way could and would be practiced.
On this principle of separation, Menno Simons says this, All the
evangelical scriptures teach us that the church of Christ was and is in doctrine,
life, and worship of people separated from the world.
In the great debate of 1528 at Zöwingen, spokesman of the Swiss brethren said this,
The true church is separated from the world and is conformed to the nature of
Christ.
If a church is yet at one with the world, we cannot recognize it as a true church.
In a sense, this principle of non-conformity to the world is merely a
negative expression of the positive requirement of discipleship.
But it goes further in a sense that it represents a judgment on the contemporary
social order which the Anabaptists called the world as non-Christian and sets up a
line of demarcation between the Christian community and worldly societies.
A logical outcome of the concept of non-conformity to the world was the
concept of a suffering church.
Conflicts with the world was inevitable for those who endeavored to live an
earnest Christian life.
The Anabaptists expected opposition.
They took literally the words of Jesus when he said, In this world ye shall have
tribulation.
But they also took literally his words of encouragement, But be of good cheer,
I have overcome the world.
Conrad Grebel said in 1524, True Christian believers are sheep among wolves,
sheep for the slaughter.
They must be baptized in anguish and affliction, tribulation, persecution,
suffering and death.
They must be tried with fire and must reap the fatherland of eternal rest,
not by killing their bodily enemy, but by mortifying their spiritual enemies.
Professor Ernest Steilen of Basel, Switzerland says this, Anabaptism,
by its earnest determination to follow in life and practice the primitive Christian
church, has kept alive the conviction that he who is in Christ is a new creature and
that those who are identified with his cause will necessarily encounter the
opposition of the world.
Perhaps it was persecution that made the Anabaptists so acutely aware of the
conflict between the church and the world.
But this persecution was due to the fact that they refused to accept what they
considered the sub-Christian way of life practiced in European Christendom.
They could have avoided the persecution had they but conformed, or they could have
suspended the practice of their faith to a more convenient time and settled under the
false colors as did David Joris.
But they chose with dauntless courage and simple honesty to live their faith,
to defy the existing world order and to suffer the consequences.
Basic to the Anabaptist vision of the church was the insistence on the practice
of true brotherhood and love among the members of the church.
This principle was understood to mean not merely the expression of pious sentiments,
but the actual practice of sharing possessions to meet the needs of others in
the spirit of true mutual aid.
Hans Leopold, a Swiss brother and martyr of 1528, said of the brethren,
If they know of anyone who is in need, whether or not he is a member of their
church, they believe it is their duty, out of love to God, to render help and
aid.
Heinrich Seeler, a Swiss brother and martyr of 1535, said, I do not believe it
wrong that a Christian has property of his own, but yet he is nothing more than a
steward.
An early Hutterian book states that one of the questions addressed by the Swiss
brethren to applicants for baptism was, whether they would consecrate themselves
with all their temporal possessions to the service of God and His people.
A Protestant of Strasbourg, a visitor at a Swiss brethren baptism service in the city
in 1557, reports that a question addressed to all applicants for baptism was this,
whether they, if necessary require it, would devote all their possessions to the
service of the brotherhood and would not fail any member that is in need if they
were able to render it.
Heinrich Bullinger, the bitter enemy of the brethren states,
This principle of full brotherhood and stewardship was actually practiced and not
merely speculatively considered.
In its absolute form, with the complete repudiation of private property,
it became the way of life of the Hutterian brotherhood in 1528 and has remained so to
this day, for the Hutterites held that private property is the greatest enemy of
Christian love.
One of the inspiring stories of the 16th and 17th centuries is the successful
practice of the full communal way of life by this group.
The third great element of the Anabaptist vision was the ethic of love and
non-resistance as applied to all human relationships.
The brethren understood this to mean complete abandonment of all warfare,
strife, and violence, and of the taking of human life.
Conrad Grebel, the Swiss, said in 1524,
Neither should they thus protect themselves.
Pilgrim Marpeck, the South German leader in 1544, speaking of Matthew 5,
said, All bodily, worldly, carnal, earthly fightings, conflicts, and wars are
annulled and abolished among them through such law, which law of love Christ himself
observed and thereby gave his followers a pattern to follow after.
Peter Riedemann, the Hutterian leader, wrote in 1545, Christ, the Prince of
Peace, has established his kingdom, that is, his church, and has purchased it
by his blood.
In this kingdom all worldly warfare has ended.
Therefore a Christian has no part in war, nor does he wield the sword to execute
vengeance." Menno Simons of Holland wrote in 1550, The regenerated do not go to war
nor engage in strife.
They are the children of peace who have beaten their swords into plowshares and
their spears into pruning hooks.
And of no war, spears and swords of iron, we leave to those who, alas, consider
human blood and swine's blood of well-nigh equal value." In this principle of
non-resistance or biblical pacifism, which was thoroughly believed and
resolutely practiced by all the original Anabaptist brethren and their descendants
throughout Europe from the beginning until this last century, the Anabaptists were
again creative leaders, far ahead of their times in this antedating the Quakers by
over a century and a quarter.
It should also be remembered that they held this principle in a day when both
Catholic and Protestant churches not only endorsed war as an instrument of state
policy, but employed it in religious conflict.
It is true, of course, that occasional earlier prophets like Peter Kielczewski
had advocated similar views, but they left no continuing practice of the principle
behind them.
As we review the vision of the Anabaptists, it becomes clear that there
are two foci in this vision.
The first focus relates to the essential nature of Christianity.
Is Christianity primarily a matter of the reception of divine grace through a
sacramental, sacerdotal institution, as we see in Roman Catholicism?
Is it chiefly enjoyment of the inner experience of the grace of God through
faith in Christ, as in Lutheranism?
Or is it most of all the transformation of life through discipleship, as in
Anabaptism?
The Anabaptists were neither institutionalists, mystics, nor pieties,
for they laid the weight of their emphasis upon following Christ in life.
To them, it was unthinkable for one truly to be a Christian without creating a new
life on divine principles, both for himself and for all men who commit
themselves to the Christian way.
The second focus relates to the church.
For the Anabaptists, the church was neither an institution, again as
Catholicism, nor the instrument of God for the proclamation of the divine word,
as in Lutheranism, nor a resource group for individual piety, as in Pietism.
It was a brotherhood of love in which the fullness of the Christian life ideal was
expressed.
The Anabaptist vision may be further clarified by comparison of the social
ethics of the four main Christian groups of the Reformation period, Catholic,
Calvinist, Lutheran, and Anabaptist.
Catholic and Calvinist alike were optimistic about the world, agreeing that
the world can be redeemed.
They held that the entire social order can be brought under the sovereignty of God
and Christianized, and although they used different means to attain this goal.
Lutheran and Anabaptist were pessimistic about the world, denying the possibility
of Christianizing the entire social order.
But the consequent attitudes of these two groups toward the social order were
diametrically opposed.
Lutheranism said that since the Christian must live in a world order that remains
sinful, he must make a compromise with it.
As a citizen, he cannot avoid participation in the evils of the world.
For instance, in making war.
And for this, his only recourse is to seek forgiveness by the grace of God.
Only within his personal, private experience can the Christian truly
Christianize his life.
The Anabaptist rejected this view completely.
Since for him, no compromise dare be made with evil, the Christian may in no
circumstance participate in any conduct in the existing social order which is
contrary to the spirit and teaching of Christ and the apostolic practice.
He must consequently withdraw from the worldly system and create a Christian
social order within the fellowship of the church brotherhood.
Extension of this Christian order by the conversion of individuals and their
transfer out of the world into the church is the only way by which progress can be
made in Christianizing the social order.
However, the Anabaptists were realistic.
Down the long perspective of the future, he saw little chance that the mass of
humankind would enter such a brotherhood with its high ideals.
Hence, he anticipated a long and grievous conflict between the church and the world.
Neither did he anticipate the time when the church would rule the world.
The church would always be a suffering church.
He agreed with the words of Jesus when he said that those who would be his disciples
must deny themselves, take up their cross daily, and follow him, and that there
would be few who would enter the straight gate and travel the narrow way of life.
If this prospect should seem too discouraging, the Anabaptists reply that
the life within the Christian brotherhood is satisfyingly full of love and joy.
The Anabaptist vision was not a detailed blueprint for the reconstruction of human
society, but the brethren did believe that Jesus intended that the kingdom of God
should be set in the midst of earth, here and now, and this they proposed to do
forthwith.
We shall not believe, they said, that the Sermon on the Mount or any other
vision that he had is only a heavenly vision meant but to keep his followers in
tension until the last great day, but we shall practice what he taught,
believing that where he walked, we can, by his grace, follow in his steps.
This concludes the Anabaptist vision by Harold S.
Bender.
But allow me, if I may, to lift this old message out of the vaults of history and
lay the question to our current experience.
What is your faith like?
Is your faith that which exists merely as a receptacle of sacramental or mechanical
rites that you have participated in in the past?
Or is it, like so many today, a mere profession, a fleeting prayer or a creed
spoken with no repentance or no real change in your life?
Or are you, as the Anabaptists in this message have challenged, a genuine
follower of Christ?
Jesus said, repent, and he said, follow me.
If you believe him, you can, by his grace, do just that.
And what about your view of the church?
Is your church an institution that exists merely to keep the structure going?
Or is your view of the church, like most today, and you see it more as a
collection of individuals?
Do you see the church, as Bender challenged, a resource of individual
piety?
Allow me to invite you to dare to experience church life, even in this day
and age, as a covenanted group of brethren, called out of the world and
called into a joyful society of commitment, sharing, and discipleship.
Well, if you choose such a faith, with such a practice, be careful.
Like the early Anabaptists, it could cost you everything, even your life.
Well, thank you for listening, and may God bless and guide your way.
Christ is our God.