Who Were They?
The Anabaptists
Acts 19:1-5
1And it came to pass, that, while Apollos was at
Corinth, Paul having passed through the upper
coasts came to Ephesus: and finding certain
disciples, 2He said unto them, Have ye received the
Holy Ghost since ye believed? And they said unto
him, We have not so much as heard whether there
be any Holy Ghost. 3And he said unto them, Unto
what then were ye baptized? And they said, Unto
John's baptism. 4Then said Paul, John verily
baptized with the baptism of repentance, saying
unto the people, that they should believe on him
which should come after him, that is, on Christ
Jesus. 5When they heard this, they were baptized in
the name of the Lord Jesus.
[JFR]
We continue to examine those groups who were
active during the Reformation Period. Pastor K.
David, pastor of the Calvary Baptist Church in Post
Falls, Idaho, remains our source for material for this
presentation.
[Oldfield]
~ 234 ~
Church History Through the Trail of Blood
Over the last couple of months I have said that I
would not
be
ashamed to
be called a “Donatist,” a “Montanist” or
an “Albigense.” But something that I haven’t
done is stop someone, telling them, “Hey, why don’t
you address me as one of the Waldenses,” or “Call
me a Paulician.” With tonight’s subject, I
will change my approach just a bit. If you walk
outside the front of our building and look up at the
sign over the door, you’ll see that I actually do call
our church “Anabaptist.” Not only am I not
ashamed to be called an “Anabaptist.” I actually
encourage people to do so. While agreeing with
most of the Novatian’s doctrines, it would be
probably be inappropriate to call our church
a “Novatian” congregation,
because
we
are separated
by
centuries and
personal relationships. But all of those groups that I
have
just
named
have been
called “Anabaptists” from time to time, and true
Baptist churches are still practicing a kind of
anabaptism today.
I believe I have told you several times about how
much
I like
the
little
book – “Chamber’s
Etymological Dictionary.” It is about a hundred
years old and was published primarily to explain
the source of common words. But it is also highly
accurate in other ways. When I googled the
word “Anabaptist” the first three dictionaries on
~ 235 ~
Church History Through the Trail of Blood
which I clicked all tried to talk about the
Anabaptist Mûnster rebellion, which I will get to in
a few minutes. But those references are highly
misleading, because anabaptism is about 1,500 years
older than Mûnster. This little dictionary properly
says, “Anabaptist, n, one who holds that baptism
ought to be administered only to adults (by
immersion), and therefore that those baptized in
infancy ought to be baptized again.” The
words “ought to be baptized again” are in italics.
Then it concludes with “(Gr. ana, again, baptizo, to
dip in water, to baptize.)” My big dictionary which I
took
to
university
back in the 1960’s
defines “Anabaptist” as any of several religious
groups who started rebaptizing people back in the
16th century. While that is correct up to a point, it
is not completely true, and thus it is thoroughly
misleading.
What is the actual origin of the Anabaptist
movement?
First, it needs to be said that there never has been an
Anabaptist “movement.” A movement is “a group
of people working together to advance their shared
political, social, or artistic ideas.” It sounds
like some sort of conspiracy. But what Paul did
in Acts 19 with a certain group of professed disciples
in Ephesus, was not the beginning of a conspiracy
or movement. Without getting into the details, those
men had been immersed under what they thought
~ 236 ~
Church History Through the Trail of Blood
was the authority of John the Baptist, but Paul
baptized them again. He rebaptized them, in Greek
he “anabaptizo” those people – although that word
is not in this scripture.
Jumping forward 1500 years, the Protestants began
using the term more commonly than their Roman
cousins. Luther, Calvin and others began pointing
their fingers at the Waldenses and other pre-
reformation
groups,
calling
them “Anabaptists,” and doing so with a sneer in
their voice. Like the Catholics, the Protestants
have usually
hated and
even murdered the “Anabaptists.” There
were pockets of Baptistic people who were offended
by the name, pointing out that the adults who they
were immersing had not been really been
baptized when they were christened as babies. On the
other hand, there were other churches which
embraced
the
term –
as
I
do.
Either
way, “Anabaptist,” became
more
and
more common as the Protestant Reformation
continued, but it did not apply to those Protestants
themselves.
Again, who were the first “Anabaptists,” and when
did people start applying that term to God’s
churches? Mosheim, the Lutheran historian put it
this way – “The origin of the sect, who from their
repetition of baptism … are called Anabaptist, but
who are also denominated Mennonites, from the
~ 237 ~
Church History Through the Trail of Blood
celebrated man to whom they own a large share of
their present prosperity, is hid in the remote depths
of
antiquity.” Mosheim
equated “Baptist”
with “Mennonite” and sometimes interchanged the
names. He said, The Mennonites “suddenly started
up, in various countries of Europe, under the
influence of leaders of dissimilar character and
views; and at a time when the first contests with the
Catholics so engrossed the attention of all… The
modern Mennonites affirm, that their predecessors
were the descendants of those Waldneses, who were
oppressed by the tyranny of the Papists….” Going on
Mosheim wrote, “In the first place I believe the
Mennonites are not altogether in the wrong, when
they boast of a descent from these Waldenses,
Petrobrussians and others, who are usually styled
witnesses for the truth before Luther: Prior to the
age of Luther, there lay concealed in almost every
country of Europe, but especially in Bohemia,
Moravia, Switzerland and Germany very many
persons, in whose minds were deeply rooted that
principle which the Waldenses, Wycliffites, and the
Husites maintained, some more covertly and others
more openly; namely that the kingdom which Christ
set up on the earth, the visible church, is an assembly
of holy persons; and ought therefore to be entirely
free from not only ungodly persons and sinners, but
from all institutions of human device …. This
principle lay at the foundation which was the source
of all that was new and singular in the religion of the
~ 238 ~
Church History Through the Trail of Blood
Mennonites; and the greatest part of their singular
opinions, as is well attested, were supposed some
centuries before Luther’s time, by those who had
such views of the Church of Christ.”
Robert Barlcay, a Quaker, and no friend of the
Baptists wrote – “We shall afterwards show the rise
of the Anabaptists took place prior to the
Reformation of the Church of England, and there are
also reasons for believing that on the continent of
Europe small hidden Christian societies, who have
held many of the opinions of the Anabaptists, have
existed from the times of the apostles. In the sense of
the direct transmission of Divine Truth, and the true
nature of spiritual religion, it seems probably that
these churches have a linage or succession more
ancient than the Roman Church.”
And speaking of the Roman Church, I’ll repeat the
statement of the Roman Catholic Cardinal Hosius
– “The Anabaptists are a pernicious sect. Of which
kind the Waldensian brethren seem to have been.”
And Zwingli, the Swiss reformer is quoted to have
said – “The institution of Anabaptism is no novelty,
but for three hundred years has caused great
disturbance to the church, and has acquired such
strength that the attempt in this age to contend with
it appears futile…”
~ 239 ~
Church History Through the Trail of Blood
I have used the word “Anabaptist” several times…,
because from the beginning that was a word thrown
against people like us by the church of Rome. John
T. Christian says that even before the time of the
Roman Church, the Montanists “insisted that those
who had ‘lapsed’ from the true faith should be
rebaptized, because they had denied Christ and ought
to be baptized anew.” Therefore, the Montanists
were called “Anabaptists.” Augustine back in the
4th century called the Donatists “Anabaptists.” I
pointed
out…that
Baptist
historian David
Benedict denied
that
the Donatists were
true
Baptists, because that is what he had been taught by
the Protestants before his conversion. But then he
began his own independent study, after which he
called them both Baptists and “Anabaptists.” Robert
Robinson says
that
the Novatian churches
were “Anabaptists.” Of the Waldensians, historian
Wall,
not
only
called
them “Anabaptists” but “antipedobaptists – that is
opponents of infant baptism.
The point is, there have been rebaptizers of one sort
or another in every age since Paul first
rebaptized those men in Ephesus.
But can we be dogmatic on what the early
“Anabaptists” believed.
Yes, we can, at least on one point – they believed
people needed to be rebaptized when they joined
~ 240 ~
Church History Through the Trail of Blood
them. But after that statement we can get into
trouble. Just as the 21st century name “Baptist” can
mean a great many different things, the 16th century
name “Anabaptists” meant a variety of things as
well.
Listen carefully to the following quote – “I would
engage to show that baptism as viewed and practiced
by the Baptists, had its advocates in every century up
to the Christian era … and independent of whose
existence (the German Anabaptists), clouds of
witnesses attest the fact, that before the Reformation
from popery, and from the apostolic age, to the
present time, the sentiments of Baptists and the
practice of baptism have had a continue chain of
advocates, and public monuments of their existence
in every century can be produced.” That is a
statement with which I don’t any criticism. But I
have a lot of criticism against the man who made
the
statement
– Alexander Campbell. The
Campbellites
practice “anabaptism,” but
they rebaptize because they believe in baptismal
regeneration, and only through their ministers can
water wash away sin. The Church of Christ
Campbellites are “anabaptist” heretics. In other
words, just because someone is an “Anabaptist,” it
doesn’t mean that he rebaptizes for the right
reason or that the rest of his theology is Biblical.
It
is
a
sad,
sad
fact the
most
famous
individual “Anabaptist,” was
a
mad
man
~ 241 ~
Church History Through the Trail of Blood
named Thomas Mûnzer, when in fact he was not a
true “Anabaptist” at
all.
Mûnzer
had
been
a Catholic
priest,
but
then
he began
to
follow another former priest, Martin Luther, in that
man’s rebellion against Rome. For a time, Luther and
Mûnzer
were tightly
linked. Some
called
Mûnzer “Luther’s curate,” and Luther called him
his “Absalom,” probably because he “stole the
hearts of the men of Israel.” Eventually Mûnzer and
Luther had a falling out, and Mûnzer declared that
he had become an “Anabaptist” while Luther went
on to hate the “Anabaptists.”
It is said Mûnzer had a very down to earth preaching
style, and he had a humility which endeared him too
just about everyone. After some time, people began
gathering
around
him,
calling
themselves “peasants.”
Mûnzer
and
his
disciples published a set of articles, which were read
everywhere they went to preach. They said, every
congregation shall be free to elect its own
pastor. That
sounds
pretty
Baptistic.
The
people’s tithes shall be applied to the support of their
pastor and the residue given to the poor – okay. But
then – vassal service shall be abolished. Forests are
not the property of nobles and princes; anyone shall
be able to hunt and fish therein. All arbitrary and
increasing duties and rents shall cease. The gentry
shall not be able to take away the people’s
property. And the right of nobles to tax the
~ 242 ~
Church History Through the Trail of Blood
inheritances of widows and orphans shall be
abolished. At the conclusion of these articles the
peasants promised to give up any of those principles
which were contrary to the Word of God. Now, do
these
points
sound
like Baptist
doctrine or
the planks of some sort of political platform?
With doctrines like these, very friendly to the
impoverished slaves of the pope and the
king, Mûnzer became a popular man. History tells
us that Luther became his enemy and encouraged
the princes to put down his rebellion. In a tract
Luther wrote, “Strike, strike, slay, front and rear;
nothing is more devilish than sedition; it is a mad dog
that bites you if you do not destroy it. There must be
no sleep, no patience, no mercy; they are all the
children of the devil.” How do we explain Luther’s
attitude? Remember that like the Catholics
the Reformers wanted
that homogenous
society where religion, government, education,
economy, recreation, and everything else blend
together. It was just that the Reformers wanted that
united society under their flag rather than the pope of
Rome. As such Mûnzer had become as much
an enemy of Luther just as he was of the German
princes. On May 15, 1525, with several thousand of
his followers, Mûnzer met the armies of German
Princes, and no less than 5,000 peasants lost their
lives. They died not fighting for religious liberty or
Biblical truth, but for a political cause. But because
~ 243 ~
Church History Through the Trail of Blood
Mûnzer claimed to be an “Anabaptist” he has gone
down in history as one of our lunatic heroes.
As J.T. Christian has written, “Thomas Mûnzer, the
leader of the tumult, was never a Baptist, but all his
life was a Paedobaptist dreamer.” He quotes Harry
S. Burrage, “Indeed, in no sense of the term and at
no period of his career, was he an Anabaptist, though
strangely enough he is often called the founder and
leader of the Anabaptists.” And D.B. Ray says, “the
authors of the Royal Encyclopedia are positive in
their statement that the Baptists have no connection
with the Munster mob.” Ray says , “No one, now
except an extremely wicked or ignorant man, will, in
the face of these historic facts, persist to affirm that
the
Baptists
originated
with
the
Munster
affair.” Thomas Mûnzer is another example of our
enemy’s attempt at re-writing our history against
us.
There is another name often associated with
the “Anabaptists” – Menno
Simons. Simmons
was born in Holland in 1496 and was educated to
become a Catholic priest. While observing the mass
one day, he was struck with the thought that the
bread and wine could not possibly be the literal body
and blood of Christ. When he witnessed the
martyrdom of an Anabaptist, he became more
serious in his studies. In 1537 he was baptized by
Obbe Philip, a well-known Anabaptist, and soon he
became one of their leaders. He was not the founder
~ 244 ~
Church History Through the Trail of Blood
of the Mennonite faith, and of course the
Anabaptists had been around for centuries before
Simons came along, but in northern Europe his name
became synonymous with both. Today, although
claiming a relationship to Menno Simons, modern
Mennonites have fallen into the Protestant slough,
and are no more related to the original Anabaptists
than are the Lutherans or Catholics.
What did the bulk of the Anabaptists believe as the
Reformation was getting underway? What did
the original Mennonites believe before they started
falling away? W. A. Jarrel calls Henry Burrage one
of the highest authorities on the Anabaptists. Burrage
asks, “What were some of the ideas that
characterized the Anabaptist movement of the
sixteenth century? The following are especially
worthy of attention: That the Scriptures are the only
authority in matters of faith and practice. That
personal faith in Jesus Christ only secures salvation;
therefore infant baptism is to be rejected. That a
church is composed of believers who have been
baptized upon a personal confession of their faith in
Jesus Christ. That each church has entire control of
its affairs, without interference on the part of any
external power. That the outward life must be in
accordance with such a confession of faith, and to
the end it is essential that church discipline should
‘be maintained. That while the State may properly
demand obedience in all things not contrary to the
~ 245 ~
Church History Through the Trail of Blood
law of God, it has no right to set aside the dictates of
conscience, and compel the humblest individual to
set aside his views, or to inflict punishment in case
such surrender is refused. Every human soul is
directly
responsible
to God.” These ideas
characterized
the
Anabaptist
movement
in
Switzerland. They characterize true Baptists today.
Burrage even adds, “Their hymns, which happily
have been preserved, show no trace of revolutionary
or fanatical doctrines, but abound in devout
sentiments pertaining to Christian experience and
hope, and exhortation to fidelity and steadfastness in
the faith, although persecution and death should be
the result.”
If these are indeed among the principal doctrines of
the Anabaptists, then I will continue to identify with
them. But what about all those doctrines not
mentioned – like the deity and virgin birth of Christ,
the realities of Heaven and Hell and such things?
The reason they are not often mentioned in the
history
of
that
day is
that
such
things
were believed by most of the Protestants, and they
didn’t come up in their debates with the Anabaptists.
Even the Catholics believed in the deity of Christ
and the reality of Hell.
Despite radical Anabaptists like Mûnzer, there
were thousands of these people in the 16thcentury
and following. They were descendants of the earlier
Waldenses, Albigenses and Paulicians,...
~ 246 ~
Church History Through the Trail of Blood
Church History Through the Trail of
Blood