Early church fathers believed by Anabaptists.

[Kenny1995]

I’m curious if any Anabaptist Christians ever read some of the early writings of Clement of Rome, Ignatius of Antioch, Polycarp of Smyrna, Justin Martyr, Irenaeus of Lyons, Tertullian of Carthage, Clement of Alexandria, or Origen of Alexandria. I remember reading about a couple of these men when I was growing up, but no longer remember if any of them were considered trust worthy. I’ve definitely read some things they taught that is different from how I understood the scriptures to teach.

Edit to add an example. Some of these men very clearly teach that Jesus was literal flesh and blood born of Mary, however I Menno Simons taught it wasn’t literal flesh like us. That’s a teaching the church I was raised in still holds to.

[JayP]

This would be time for the semi annual David Bercot entry

[Neto]

I’m curious if any Anabaptist Christians ever read some of the early writings of Clement of Rome, Ignatius of Antioch, Polycarp of Smyrna, Justin Martyr, Irenaeus of Lyons, Tertullian of Carthage, Clement of Alexandria, or Origen of Alexandria. I remember reading about a couple of these men when I was growing up, but no longer remember if any of them were considered trust worthy. I’ve definitely read some things they taught that is different from how I understood the scriptures to teach.

Edit to add an example. Some of these men very clearly teach that Jesus was literal flesh and blood born of Mary, however I Menno Simons taught it wasn’t literal flesh like us. That’s a teaching the church I was raised in still holds to.

In contrast to men like John Calvin, Menno emphasized the Scripture that states that the Word BECAME flesh, not 'took on' flesh (as though the Son of God 'appropriated or possessed' an existing human child). Menno's error was based on a faulty scientific explanation of that era that maintained that the mother is 'only' the 'vessel' in which a child grows and develops before birth. (Like saying that Jesus was born 'out of' Mary, but not 'of' Mary.)

It is important to note that there are heresies built on the wording used by Calvin, but as far as I can tell, none based on Menno's erroneous theory of the incarnation. But I am also unaware of any explanation Calvin ever gave as to why he used that faulty wording.

[Thomas_muntzer]

I’m curious if any Anabaptist Christians ever read some of the early writings of Clement of Rome, Ignatius of Antioch, Polycarp of Smyrna, Justin Martyr, Irenaeus of Lyons, Tertullian of Carthage, Clement of Alexandria, or Origen of Alexandria. I remember reading about a couple of these men when I was growing up, but no longer remember if any of them were considered trust worthy. I’ve definitely read some things they taught that is different from how I understood the scriptures to teach.

Edit to add an example. Some of these men very clearly teach that Jesus was literal flesh and blood born of Mary, however I Menno Simons taught it wasn’t literal flesh like us. That’s a teaching the church I was raised in still holds to.

I consider patristic writings to be very valuable, as well as historical documents from the time of Jesus—such as Flavius ​​Josephus's *The Jewish War*; I find it fascinating to observe how many debates that remain relevant today were discussed in much the same way during the early centuries of Christianity.

As for early Anabaptists like Menno Simons, George Blaurock, Wilhelm Reublin, Johannes Brotli, and Dirk Philips—they were all Catholic priests, so they certainly read the authors you mention.

[Neto]

In Foundation of Christian Doctrine, where Menno is dealing with the question of infant baptism, he mentions several men: Origen, Augustine, Cyprian, Turtillian, Rhenanus, Eusebius (whom he cites by book, volume & chapter).

He then goes on to quote or mention several writers of his own era, such as Erasmus of Rotterdam (Geert Geerts), Sebastian Franck, Zwingli, Martin Cellarius (Borrhaus).

[barnhart]

I think Hubmaier referenced the patristics but I can't point to a list of specific ones.