Who can be called Anabaptist?

[Ken]

I gotta run so I don't have time to post up the results, but you can look up "mennonnite" "brethren" "two kingdom" and other related terms and find interesting results.

Results for "mennonnite" are not particularly interesting.

Well, maybe “interesting” is the wrong word. But if you type in just “Mennonite” you get peaks in 1930, 1950, and 1990. I find that curious. What happened during those time periods to make the word more commonly used in the English language? And why has it declined since 1990?

I expect the use of the word “brethren” was so much higher in the early 19th century because it was being used in a more general religious context and not simply to refer to Church of the Brethren or Mennonite Brethren.

I find these questions interesting. But then maybe I’m just weird.

[Neto]

What about the Brethren and German Baptist groups? They date to 1708 rather than 1525, yet are usually considered Anabaptist.

Two things, the first just for clarity. Technically, the "German Baptists" are part of the Brethren groups; Brethren is still usually included in the formal name of each of their splinter groups / divisions, except for 1 or two, perhaps. The ones called German Baptists (in Anabaptist circles) are usually one of the variations of the "Old German Baptist Brethren" (the Old Order break off from Church of the Brethren back in 1881). They (and others) often tend to get lazy (who wouldn't when they keep adding more names to their formal monikers, lol...case in point, the OGBBC-NC of which I am a member) and refer to themselves as German Baptists (unless they are differentiating from a similar Brethren group).

To the actual question above though, we are not denominational descended from any formal "Anabaptist" group. We had interactions with some of them in the late 1600s / early 1700s in Germany, but our progenitors were mostly Lutherans associated or directly influenced by the Radical Pietist movement that was pushing for greater spirituality in the churches in reaction to the dry dogmatic arguments and discourses over theological minutae. Through that influence and interactions with some of the Anabaptists (and their written materials) of the day, along with some interaction with the Dutch Collegiants, they eventually came to the conviction (as did the Anabaptist movement proper) of a need for believers baptism, and proceeded to organize accordingly. Many of our shared "Anabaptist" beliefs and practiced stemmed from those early interactions, as well as significant interaction with Mennonites in Germany, Holland, and eventually the Americas a few years later. But as far as denominational descendants, we are technically independent from any hard lines on the Anabaptist family tree...

This is interesting, as it sounds like you are talking about the same group (or probably an earlier form of the same movement) by which the Dutch Mennonites in the Molotschna were very much influenced in the middle 1800's, resulting in the revival there that brought about the Mennonite Brethren church.

[Pelerin]

To the actual question above though, we are not denominational descended from any formal "Anabaptist" group. We had interactions with some of them in the late 1600s / early 1700s in Germany, but our progenitors were mostly Lutherans associated or directly influenced by the Radical Pietist movement that was pushing for greater spirituality in the churches in reaction to the dry dogmatic arguments and discourses over theological minutae. Through that influence and interactions with some of the Anabaptists (and their written materials) of the day, along with some interaction with the Dutch Collegiants, they eventually came to the conviction (as did the Anabaptist movement proper) of a need for believers baptism, and proceeded to organize accordingly. Many of our shared "Anabaptist" beliefs and practiced stemmed from those early interactions, as well as significant interaction with Mennonites in Germany, Holland, and eventually the Americas a few years later. But as far as denominational descendants, we are technically independent from any hard lines on the Anabaptist family tree...

Would you have heard stories about, say, Conrad Grebel, Felix Manz, or Michael Sattler? Would you think of them as “us”? Is the Martyr’s Mirror something you’d have? (Anybody from other Brethren circles feel free to answer too.)

[Heirbyadoption]

To the actual question above though, we are not denominational descended from any formal "Anabaptist" group. We had interactions with some of them in the late 1600s / early 1700s in Germany, but our progenitors were mostly Lutherans associated or directly influenced by the Radical Pietist movement that was pushing for greater spirituality in the churches in reaction to the dry dogmatic arguments and discourses over theological minutae. Through that influence and interactions with some of the Anabaptists (and their written materials) of the day, along with some interaction with the Dutch Collegiants, they eventually came to the conviction (as did the Anabaptist movement proper) of a need for believers baptism, and proceeded to organize accordingly. Many of our shared "Anabaptist" beliefs and practiced stemmed from those early interactions, as well as significant interaction with Mennonites in Germany, Holland, and eventually the Americas a few years later. But as far as denominational descendants, we are technically independent from any hard lines on the Anabaptist family tree...

Would you have heard stories about, say, Conrad Grebel, Felix Manz, or Michael Sattler? Would you think of them as “us”? Is the Martyr’s Mirror something you’d have? (Anybody from other Brethren circles feel free to answer too.)

Most of us would have had a Martyr's MIrror in our homes or have been familiar with it, kids would have read things like "Coals of Fire" and been familiar with early Anabaptist stories. Having said that, it was well instilled in us that we were half-Anabaptist and half-Radical Pietist in theological origins, but definitely not Mennonite, what with things like our practice of trine immersion, our lovefeasts (including actual wine), our decision making process at our annual conference, etc, etc. To your question about Grebel, Manz, etc being "us", we would have tended to view them as "them" isntead, but in the sense of cousins with much in common, rather than some utterly disconnected theological or sociological group. Being the "non-Anabaptist" Old Orders was somewhat central to our self-identity. Kraybill & Bowman's book "On The Backroad To Heaven" would give a good overview of some of this, though naturally any group has more diversity and eccentricities than any such book is really able to cover effectively.

CLP and Rod&Staff keep/kept most of us well supplied with reading material, as we had a few writers among us but never really had any central publishing group for books and curriculum. Few if any would know much (if anything) about later writers like Daniel Kauffman, the Brunks, etc.

[Neto]

To the actual question above though, we are not denominational descended from any formal "Anabaptist" group. We had interactions with some of them in the late 1600s / early 1700s in Germany, but our progenitors were mostly Lutherans associated or directly influenced by the Radical Pietist movement that was pushing for greater spirituality in the churches in reaction to the dry dogmatic arguments and discourses over theological minutae. Through that influence and interactions with some of the Anabaptists (and their written materials) of the day, along with some interaction with the Dutch Collegiants, they eventually came to the conviction (as did the Anabaptist movement proper) of a need for believers baptism, and proceeded to organize accordingly. Many of our shared "Anabaptist" beliefs and practiced stemmed from those early interactions, as well as significant interaction with Mennonites in Germany, Holland, and eventually the Americas a few years later. But as far as denominational descendants, we are technically independent from any hard lines on the Anabaptist family tree...

Would you have heard stories about, say, Conrad Grebel, Felix Manz, or Michael Sattler? Would you think of them as “us”? Is the Martyr’s Mirror something you’d have? (Anybody from other Brethren circles feel free to answer too.)

Most of us would have had a Martyr's MIrror in our homes or have been familiar with it, kids would have read things like "Coals of Fire" and been familiar with early Anabaptist stories. Having said that, it was well instilled in us that we were half-Anabaptist and half-Radical Pietist in theological origins, but definitely not Mennonite, what with things like our practice of trine immersion, our lovefeasts (including actual wine), our decision making process at our annual conference, etc, etc. To your question about Grebel, Manz, etc being "us", we would have tended to view them as "them" isntead, but in the sense of cousins with much in common, rather than some utterly disconnected theological or sociological group. Being the "non-Anabaptist" Old Orders was somewhat central to our self-identity. Kraybill & Bowman's book "On The Backroad To Heaven" would give a good overview of some of this, though naturally any group has more diversity and eccentricities than any such book is really able to cover effectively.

CLP and Rod&Staff keep/kept most of us well supplied with reading material, as we had a few writers among us but never really had any central publishing group for books and curriculum. Few if any would know much (if anything) about later writers like Daniel Kauffman, the Brunks, etc.

I'm curious if you would have ever heard of the Lutheran Pietist Eduard Wuest.
https://cmbs.mennonitebrethren.ca/perso ... 1818-1859/

See also (starting pg 37):
https://books.google.com/books?id=BNEh8 ... st&f=false
and
https://fpuscholarworks.fresno.edu/bits ... sAllowed=y

This man's preaching was very instrumental in the revival that brought about the Mennonite Brethren church, with a consciousness at its center that "Mennonites are not the only true Christians". (It was because of this willingness to call non-Mennonites "Brother" that the Big Church Mennonites in the colonies dubbed these "fanatics" as "Brethren".)

[Heirbyadoption]

Our interactions with the [Radical] Pietists ceased in the early/mid-1700s. We would have been influenced by Arndt, Spener, Franck, etc. Hoffman would have been a direct interaction at the time of our formation. We had pretty much emigrated to America by 1740 or so...

[MaxPC]

Our interactions with the [Radical] Pietists ceased in the early/mid-1700s. We would have been influenced by Arndt, Spener, Franck, etc. Hoffman would have been a direct interaction at the time of our formation. We had pretty much emigrated to America by 1740 or so...

Do you have any dialogue or connections to Brethren Revival Fellowship or Covenant Brethren Church?

[Heirbyadoption]

Our interactions with the [Radical] Pietists ceased in the early/mid-1700s. We would have been influenced by Arndt, Spener, Franck, etc. Hoffman would have been a direct interaction at the time of our formation. We had pretty much emigrated to America by 1740 or so...

Do you have any dialogue or connections to Brethren Revival Fellowship or Covenant Brethren Church?

None formally. Some of us touch base now again on a personal level. A few of our folks do participate in the Brethren World Assembly, though.