1525-2025: 500 years of the Anabaptist movement

[mike]

We are nearing the 500th anniversary of the Anabaptist movement, which is thought to have formally begin in 1525.

It was a Reformation-era Christian renewal movement immediately hated and persecuted by Catholics and Protestants.

Anabaptism was a sixteenth-century religious movement which grew out of the popular and widespread religious and social discontent of that age. Its immediate source was the reform movement of Huldreich Zwingli that had begun in Zurich, Switzerland in 1519. Anabaptism began formally in 1525 and spread with great rapidity into nearly all European countries, but especially in the German and Dutch speaking areas of Central Europe.

It was never a unified movement if by unified we imply a common form of church order and common leadership. That was prevented from happening by the Anabaptist policy of congregational autonomy, by the fierce persecution which made Anabaptism become an underground movement, and by geographical barriers. Considerable differences therefore existed between the various Anabaptist groups in interpretation, theology and church practice. The movement was unified however in certain ways which will become clear.

This thread is for discussion about what Anabaptism was, became, is today, and what it could or should be going forward.

[Ernie]

By 1550, the majority of Anabaptists believed and practiced...
1. love towards enemies (non-resistance)
2. separation unto God (non-conformity)
3. sharing extra resources with the poor as well as for the promotion of the Gospel (non-accumulation)
4. a voluntary but disciplined association of believers (pure church)
5. separation of church and state (two-kingdoms)
6. taking the Gospel to those who have not yet heard (evangelism/missions)
7. baptism upon confession of faith and walking in newness of life (believer's baptism)

Few others at that time period adhered to all seven of these points.

I think all seven of these are alive and well in various pockets of Anabaptist descendants today. But unfortunately, many Anabaptist churches today allow members in the church who do not embrace all these tenets. I think this is very sad. I'd like to see more renewal movements taking place among Anabaptists.

[Heirbyadoption]

I'd like to see more renewal movements taking place among Anabaptists.

Ernie - any thoughts on what this might potentially look like? Perhaps a hypothetical example or two?

[Ernie]

I'd like to see more renewal movements taking place among Anabaptists.

Ernie - any thoughts on what this might potentially look like? Perhaps a hypothetical example or two?

16th century Anabaptists were a renewal movement who emphasized the above seven points. Since then there have been various renewal movements that again emphasized these seven points. I write about them here.

https://kingdomoutpost.org/growing-gree ... -movement/

One thing that Plain Anabaptists have not traditionally emphasized is that of learning how to work in harmony with those who embrace these seven basic points, but think or do things a bit differently. This has probably been our Achilles' Heel.

I'd love to see Plain Anabaptists embrace the above seven points and add an eighth, that of respect and cooperation and communion with those who hold to the same basic tenants but practice them a bit differently. I'm not talking about ecumenism with churches who are losing these things but rather with churches that embrace these things. I would like to see churches in the same region working and teaming together for the sake of the kingdom, rather than "national dealerships" that churches can get franchises with.

[Josh]

Of note is that the 7 points above are virtually nonexistent outside of plain Anabaptism, and when you do find them, they often come with a group that (a) lacks multigenerational ethos and (b) has additional, questionable doctrines.

I would argue the 16th century Anabaptists weren’t aware of something that 21st century Anabaptists are. Namely:

8. God’s design for man is to live in ethno-religious communities that fully integrate peoplehood, family, and lifestyle with Anabaptist doctrines and values, and in so doing create a multigenerational church. Without this, a church is merely an assembly of people with similar intellectual ideas but otherwise disintegrates into the next generation.

[barnhart]

I'd like to see more renewal movements taking place among Anabaptists.

Ernie - any thoughts on what this might potentially look like? Perhaps a hypothetical example or two?

In my family history the Civil war was destructive and constructive. It destroyed much wealth, culture and friendship but ushered in a new era of spiritual life and growth.

[Ernie]

By 1550, the majority of Anabaptists believed and practiced...
1. love towards enemies (non-resistance)
2. separation unto God (non-conformity)
3. sharing extra resources with the poor as well as for the promotion of the Gospel (non-accumulation)
4. a voluntary but disciplined association of believers (pure church)
5. separation of church and state (two-kingdoms)
6. taking the Gospel to those who have not yet heard (evangelism/missions)
7. baptism upon confession of faith and walking in newness of life (believer's baptism)

Few others at that time period adhered to all seven of these points.

I'm thinking of three more things that could be added to this list.

8. A high view of scripture, particularly the NT (not in the sense of divine dictation but rather that scripture should be studied and applied practically and spiritually)
9. Jesus should be head of the church and his life and teachings should be modeled. (Christocentrism)
10. Normatives in the early church should be normative today. This includes practices taught by the Apostles.

Anybody want to help me with the wording of these three, or suggest additional points?

[Sudsy]

Of note is that the 7 points above are virtually nonexistent outside of plain Anabaptism, and when you do find them, they often come with a group that (a) lacks multigenerational ethos and (b) has additional, questionable doctrines.

I would argue the 16th century Anabaptists weren’t aware of something that 21st century Anabaptists are. Namely:

8. God’s design for man is to live in ethno-religious communities that fully integrate peoplehood, family, and lifestyle with Anabaptist doctrines and values, and in so doing create a multigenerational church. Without this, a church is merely an assembly of people with similar intellectual ideas but otherwise disintegrates into the next generation.

I have trouble with this one if I'm understanding it correctly. I don't believe God wants His people to live in 'ethno-religious communities' but rather to live amongst those Jesus came to save and be lights in this world of darkness. There is a gathering of believers to fellowship and learn but I believe salvation is spread through, as Jesus demonstrated, mingling with the lost. When any church only or primarily grows through having babies and raising them to believe the same, to me, that is not what it means to go into all the world and preach the Gospel.

I don't see plain Anabaptists growing the Church of Christ much outside of their own families. The group of Anabaptists I was part of (MB) had this evangelical view of reaching beyond their ethnic boundaries but they are likely considered today far from plain Anabaptists and quite worldly. I am not saying these approaches to reach the lost through modern means is all perfect and doesn't need constant considering and adjusting where needed but the attempt to get beyond ethnic barriers, imo, is the way of the Master. Jesus demonstrated mingling with sinners and certainly didn't isolate Himself from those He came to save.

But perhaps I mis-understood what you are saying.

[Josh]

God’s design for man is to live in ethnic nations of different tribes and tongues. (If you disagree with that, go consider the Tower of Babel.) This includes organisations of congregations.

A few people can be “aliens and strangers” and choose to fit in, but for a church to be able to function, people there need to be able to comfortably share a culture. Most people are uncomfortable in cross cultural settings.

[NedFlanders]

Of note is that the 7 points above are virtually nonexistent outside of plain Anabaptism, and when you do find them, they often come with a group that (a) lacks multigenerational ethos and (b) has additional, questionable doctrines.

I would argue the 16th century Anabaptists weren’t aware of something that 21st century Anabaptists are. Namely:

8. God’s design for man is to live in ethno-religious communities that fully integrate peoplehood, family, and lifestyle with Anabaptist doctrines and values, and in so doing create a multigenerational church. Without this, a church is merely an assembly of people with similar intellectual ideas but otherwise disintegrates into the next generation.

I have trouble with this one if I'm understanding it correctly. I don't believe God wants His people to live in 'ethno-religious communities' but rather to live amongst those Jesus came to save and be lights in this world of darkness. There is a gathering of believers to fellowship and learn but I believe salvation is spread through, as Jesus demonstrated, mingling with the lost. When any church only or primarily grows through having babies and raising them to believe the same, to me, that is not what it means to go into all the world and preach the Gospel.

I don't see plain Anabaptists growing the Church of Christ much outside of their own families. The group of Anabaptists I was part of (MB) had this evangelical view of reaching beyond their ethnic boundaries but they are likely considered today far from plain Anabaptists and quite worldly. I am not saying these approaches to reach the lost through modern means is all perfect and doesn't need constant considering and adjusting where needed but the attempt to get beyond ethnic barriers, imo, is the way of the Master. Jesus demonstrated mingling with sinners and certainly didn't isolate Himself from those He came to save.

But perhaps I mis-understood what you are saying.

I think Josh was pointing to a deeper fellowship in brotherhood than you find in churches you describe who loose their way after a generation or two.

I think “having things common” was key in the original Anabaptist’s and brotherhood. They also had something most Mennonites have never experienced in literally forsaking all to follow Christ and be the church, which I believe helped them relate more helpfully and readily to each others needs physically and spiritually. Brotherhood and aid could be more expanded on in your list Ernie. I think it is inferred but not quite clear enough to see the deep sense of brotherhood and fellowship they experienced.