Anabaptist and Evangelicals

[Valerie]

In my “Mennonites in Europe” history book Anabaptists were called Evangelicals- radical evangelicals if I remember right.

[Neto]

In my “Mennonites in Europe” history book Anabaptists were called Evangelicals- radical evangelicals if I remember right.

Yes, there is a 'famous' quote from Menno's writings where he refers to 'True evangelical faith'. As I understand that statement it refers to the Christian's drive to speak freely about Jesus. But I was responding to the Christianity Today article which defined 'Evangelicals' in the context of the time of its writing. (That which I unfortunately cannot find. I did more searching this evening, but no go.)

[Julian]

But from my interactions with members of Protestant groups such as Lutherans, I feel certain that, at least during that time frame, Protestants in churches like that would not have identified as Evangelicals. Evangelicals were the 'born againers'. I don't think any groups that practiced infant baptism could have been considered 'Evangelicals'

To summarize Bootstrap's point, Lutherans are Evangelical in the historic German sense but not in the modern North American sense.

Plus Lutheran theology and Evangelical theology are opposites in many ways.

[barnhart]

But from my interactions with members of Protestant groups such as Lutherans, I feel certain that, at least during that time frame, Protestants in churches like that would not have identified as Evangelicals. Evangelicals were the 'born againers'. I don't think any groups that practiced infant baptism could have been considered 'Evangelicals'

To summarize Bootstrap's point, Lutherans are Evangelical in the historic German sense but not in the modern North American sense.

Plus Lutheran theology and Evangelical theology are opposites in many ways.

Julian, maybe you could clarify which definition you had in mind when writing the article.

[barnhart]

This may be an overly obvious point, but the thick community that Julian documents as dissolving did not form organically in a vacuum by individual choice because people thought it would be better than their current experience. Rather it was forged in blood, suffering, displacement, dislocation and rejection from the modern (at that time) world.

This is what many Christians today reject while simultaneously longing for the fruit. We want the benefits but reject the potential of being ostracized by the world. Our idea of a tragedy is when the world chooses values that differ from the scripture and we might get caught between when that is actually the social arrangement which produces thick community.

I wonder if this part of the reason synthetic community is unstable, it needs constant upkeep from the outside through rules and customs whereas the community of suffering and survival springs from within.

[Julian]

To summarize Bootstrap's point, Lutherans are Evangelical in the historic German sense but not in the modern North American sense.

Plus Lutheran theology and Evangelical theology are opposites in many ways.

Julian, maybe you could clarify which definition you had in mind when writing the article.

A lot can be said here. First a bit on "evangelisch" (in the German sense) and "evangelicalism." You can cash this out as a difference between classical Protestantism and evangelicalism. Classical Protestantism, like you see in Lutheranism, classical Reformed theology or Anglicanism tends to be much more institutional, have a higher view of the sacraments, holds scripture as highest authority but is not 'biblicist' in rejecting other sources, has more continuity with the christian tradition, and is less conversionist than evangelicalism.

From this vantage point, the radical reformation is actually a lot closer to Evangelical (in the modern sense) or Baptist views in radically breaking with the mainstream tradition and affirming believers baptism. Some differences could include that Anabaptists hold to pacifism, and have tendencies to lean more in the direction of what evangelicalism might call "works righteousness," I also think that Anabaptist views on justification are closer to the Catholic view (see https://www.jstor.org/stable/3161927). (Evangelicals tend to be closer to classical Protestantism, but with the added emphasis of a "born again experience") Then, within the Hutterite tradition specifically, we would differ from Evangelicalism in wanting to live out our faith in community and in particular in community of goods.

Then as the tradition has developed, in the Hutterite case that I am most familiar with, we did develop our own traditions, structures, and thick community that kind of recreated the Catholic Christendom that early Anabaptists rejected. I see this development as more of a good thing than Evangelicals tend to, but not without its problems.

In the context of my piece, I was using the word "Evangelical" in an admittedly loose way because I assumed my audience would know roughly what I'm talking about. I quoted Frances FitzGerald who claims that revivalism “involved a rebellion against the formalism of the established churches and an effort to recover an authentic spiritual experience: a religion of the heart, as opposed to the head.” I see Evangelicals in the Hutterite world as basically those who are influenced by the broader evangelical movement. This shows up in them calling for people to have a born again experience, calling for Hutterites to do more mission or activism, drawing on evangelical sources, speakers, and commentaries, wanting evangelical practices like bible studies or testimony sharing, and broadly taking on evangelical frames of thought and expression. At the same time, they tend to see themselves as transcending their Hutterite/Anabaptist identity, feel comfortable dropping Hutterite distinctives like pacifism or community of goods, don't find existing Hutterite practices and traditions particularly meaningful or expressive of their faith, do not feel the need to describe how they stand within the Hutterite tradition and Hutterite texts, and for me most worryingly: don't seem to understand that what Hutterites are living out in community is our deepest form of witness and our attempt to live out the teachings of Jesus as a community.

[joshuabgood]

This may be an overly obvious point, but the thick community that Julian documents as dissolving did not form organically in a vacuum by individual choice because people thought it would be better than their current experience. Rather it was forged in blood, suffering, displacement, dislocation and rejection from the modern (at that time) world.

This is what many Christians today reject while simultaneously longing for the fruit. We want the benefits but reject the potential of being ostracized by the world. Our idea of a tragedy is when the world chooses values that differ from the scripture and we might get caught between when that is actually the social arrangement which produces thick community.

I wonder if this part of the reason synthetic community is unstable, it needs constant upkeep from the outside through rules and customs whereas the community of suffering and survival springs from within.

This is a very astute point. I spent two weeks this summer with Russian (German) Mennonites who moved back to Germany when the USSR dissolved. I was impressed by their very close communities. But I realized that for a few generations they needed each other to simply survive. After being forcibly relocated in the worst of condition from Ukraine to Kazakhstan, Uzbekistan, Kyrgyzstan, and Siberia, they needed each other just to survive as a people. I heard some crazy personal stories from the old folks. They have stayed unified with a tight community, churches of 800, an active missions -- with large weddings/funerals.

Interestingly, in recent times, they have become more affluent, and it seems like this is being challenged...in various ways.

[Bootstrap]

From this vantage point, the radical reformation is actually a lot closer to Evangelical (in the modern sense) or Baptist views in radically breaking with the mainstream tradition and affirming believers baptism. Some differences could include that Anabaptists hold to pacifism, and have tendencies to lean more in the direction of what evangelicalism might call "works righteousness," I also think that Anabaptist views on justification are closer to the Catholic view (see https://www.jstor.org/stable/3161927). (Evangelicals tend to be closer to classical Protestantism, but with the added emphasis of a "born again experience")

“Works righteousness,” of course, is a distinctly Lutheran theological term that assumes a particular reading of Paul’s teaching on justification. Romans presents the New Testament’s fullest development of salvation using courtroom imagery, though it also uses other metaphors. I’ve often wondered whether Paul emphasizes that imagery because he is writing to believers in Rome, where law and legal categories were so prominent. Whether or not that’s the reason, it’s striking that the New Testament also presents salvation in many other ways.

I work with some honor/shame cultures. To them, if you are welcomed back into the family, of course you will live as the family lives—perhaps imperfectly, perhaps with a little help and grace—but that’s simply part of being welcomed back. That makes sense to me as a way of understanding salvation after Adam and Eve were cast out of God’s presence.

That’s the biblical picture of salvation that resonates most deeply with me.

Then, within the Hutterite tradition specifically, we would differ from Evangelicalism in wanting to live out our faith in community and in particular in community of goods.

Then as the tradition has developed, in the Hutterite case that I am most familiar with, we did develop our own traditions, structures, and thick community that kind of recreated the Catholic Christendom that early Anabaptists rejected. I see this development as more of a good thing than Evangelicals tend to, but not without its problems.

To me, community of goods is orthogonal to Evangelicalism. I don't think Evangelicalism requires individualism, and there are clearly corners of it that deeply value community and intentional community.

I think the community and culture you have are very valuable. But not very accessible for an outsider like me.