The Conditionalist Faith of Our Fathers, vol. 2

VII. Anabaptists Often Involved in Conflict Over “Soul” in Death

The conflicts of the sixteenth century over the state of the soul in death, together with the correlated fate of the wicked, frequently involved the Anabaptists. ²⁹ It is therefore essential to understand the origin, spread, and teaching of this widely scattered and often misunderstood and maligned group, in order to grasp the reason for much of the misunderstanding wherein it touches the field of our quest. One handicap to be noted at the outset is the fact that much of their contemporary history was written by avowed enemies, not by impartial historians. The facts can only be gathered from their own meager writings and from unbiased sources. ³⁰ CFF2 79.4

1. REGENERATION PREREQUISITE TO VALID BAPTISM

The term “Anabaptist” was applied to those who were rebaptized—Christians who regarded their sprinkling baptism in infancy as unscriptural and invalid, and desired to be rightly baptized according to Scripture. It will be remembered that the early Donatists and Novations rebaptized on occasion. And the later Petrobrusians, Paulicians, Henricians, and Waldenses insisted on regeneration on the part of those baptized. Such groups were thus, in a sense, the spiritual forerunners of the sixteenth-century Anabaptists ³¹ on this point. CFF2 80.1

The Anabaptist movement in Switzerland and Germany was actually a logical development of the Protestant principles laid down by Zwingli and Luther, who took the Bible as their only standard of faith and practice and held to justification by faith as the basic principle of the gospel. But it was observed by some that in such communions, church membership, as well as the celebration of the Lord’s Supper, continued to be participated in by both the “godly” and “ungodly”—that is, the truly regenerate and the unregenerate. Separation of genuine Christians from the unregenerate, who had merely been sprinkled in infancy, therefore became a requirement among the Anabaptists. Faith, they held, was a prerequisite to true baptism. CFF2 80.2

2. DISTINGUISH SOUND ADHERENTS FROM FANATICS

Another vital factor in the over-all picture is recognition of the fact that of the thousands of Anabaptists—scattered over Switzerland, Germany, the Netherlands, England, Poland, Northern Italy, Moravia, and other lands—a majority had sound and wholesome Biblical backgrounds, as, for example, the Waldensian and Bohemian Brethren bodies. Such were now intent on forming churches that would embody the Anabaptist understanding of Bible truth and would perpetuate their conscientious beliefs and practices. CFF2 80.3

However, the name Anabaptist was an elastic term, covering both true and false, as there were not only sound Baptist Anabaptists but fanatical Anabaptists and mystical Anabaptists as well. And it is to be particularly noted that it was the presence and proclivities of certain extreme groups—but all classed together as “Anabaptists”—that brought the entire movement into disrepute despite its fundamentally sound majority. It was this situation that brought on bitter opposition and persecution of Anabaptists by other religious bodies. CFF2 81.1

3. FIVE CATEGORIES OF ANABAPTISTS

For convenience, the Anabaptists may be classified as (1) the soundly Biblical majority, embodying and perpetuating the best medieval evangelical thought, such as that of the Waldenses and the Hussites; (2) the Chiliastic Anabaptists, such as the fanatical Munster group and the Zwickau prophets, who were never really Anabaptist; (3) the mystical or speculative Anabaptists who, while allied to the Anabaptists, outlawed all ordinances as incompatible to inner spiritual life; (4) a few from the Beghards and Brethren of the Free Spirit who were tinctured with pantheistic concepts; and (5) the Anti-Trinitarian Anabaptists, of the sounder group, but holding divergent views on the person of Christ. ³² These opposed the Greek and Roman Catholic position and frequently denied the eternal torment of the wicked in hell. Michael Servetus (d. 1553) was in this category. CFF2 81.2

The impetuous, who had come out of medieval enthusiasms, had bold reformatory schemes and chiliastic hopes, even believing that the Reformation itself was but a halfway measure. The Munster extravagances did more than anything else to discredit the Anabaptists as a whole, despite the limited group involved. In the folly at Munster there was first excitement, then frenzy, then madness. The whole Anabaptist movement was blamed for the misdeeds of a few in Germany, for which the rest were not responsible. Such had been bewildered by the sudden transition from darkness to day. But such fringe segments, we repeat, were never really Anabaptist. Nevertheless, they were so considered, and this brought odium on all the rest. CFF2 82.1

4. PRINCIPLES HELD BY SOUND ANABAPTISTS

Another divergence was this: To the established churches the support of the civil powers seemed imperative. But the Anabaptists held that the established Protestant churches had sacrificed truth to gain or retain the favor of their civil rulers. And they denied the right of Christians to use the sword to protect the gospel or to resist abuses. They also held that all false doctrine should be rejected, and taught separation of the pure churches from the world in worship, marriage, teachings, et cetera. And, significantly enough, some taught the sleep of the soul in death and eternal life only in Christ received at the resurrection. This inevitably developed into tension with the established churches, which in turn resulted in prohibition of the Anabaptist assemblies. However, the more they were repressed, the more they multiplied. They were thus a disturbing, devisive factor. CFF2 82.2

5. CHARACTERISTICS OF GEOGRAPHICAL GROUPS

Of the several component groups, the (1) Swiss group ³³ was quite evangelical. In fact, the earliest Anabaptists arose in Switzerland and were at first followers of Zwingli, accepting his earlier view that infant baptism has no scriptural authorization. But when he became reluctant to continue his Anabaptist teaching—for it would disfranchise many and disrupt the state church—they broke with him, about 1525. Pressure and persecution followed. They then challenged the arguments advanced in support of his position—that the tares and the wheat are to grow together in the church until the harvest, and that “he that is not against me is for me.” CFF2 82.3

The Swiss group set forth their views in their Confession of 1527, which was the basis of Zwingli’s “Refutation.” Their position on separation of “pure” churches from the world resulted in endless conflict. They condemned the support of pastors by taxation and refused obedience to the magistrates whenever such mandates were contrary to their own religious convictions. To them it was a struggle between despotism and soul freedom. They were threatened with banishment, many were imprisoned, and some were martyred by drowning. Thus by 1535 they were suppressed in Zurich. ³⁴ CFF2 83.1

(2) The Dutch Anabaptists repudiated the lawless acts of the Munster men, maintaining moderation in times of extravagance. Many had come as refugees from Switzerland, and enjoyed a degree of toleration. They had suffered much under the brutalities of the Inquisition, thousands dying at the stake and by the sword before toleration was secured. The early Dutch group, tied in closely with the Mennonites, constituted an important group in the Low Countries. Menno Simons, a converted Catholic priest, was their most prominent leader. With views akin to some of the earlier Anabaptists, he stressed many sound evangelical principles. He, however, denied the true humanity of Christ. CFF2 83.2

(3) The German Anabaptists embraced certain fanatical radicals. Their attempt at “bringing in the kingdom” by force was repugnant to other groups. But the Munster episode was met with extreme brutality. Hubmaier, though no radical, was burned at the stake. And fines, imprisonment, banishment, and death were widespread. The suppression of the Munster rebellion seemed to be the signal for all Europe to join in persecuting the Anabaptists on the ground that all were a potential menace to law and order. ³⁵ It was a time of great tension. CFF2 83.3

(4) In England, Anabaptist teaching appeared early in the sixteenth century. Large numbers came in 1528, and by 1573 there were said to be some fifty thousand adherents in Britain. In 1530 their book The Sum of Scripture was condemned by an assembly of bishops and theologians, convened by the archbishop at the command of Henry VIII. Edicts were soon issued against them. Such was the situation when Elizabeth came to the throne in 1558. They were often identified and confused with other independents, and were harassed and persecuted out of England under the Tudor monarchs. When the Stuarts in the seventeenth century pursued the same policy, many Anabaptists fled to the Netherlands. ³⁶ CFF2 84.1

(5) In northern Italy and Austria there were numerous Anabaptist churches, and some martyrdoms. CFF2 84.2

(6) In Poland the Hussite influences were quite strong. Also in that country Faustus Socinus became leader of a group that agreed with the Anabaptist position on baptism. Thus Socinianism was likewise involved. CFF2 84.3

It may therefore be said that the term “Anabaptist,” often used as an epithet of reproach, was applied to those Christians in the time of the Reformation who, adhering rigidly to the Scriptures as the infallible rule of faith and practice, stressed the obvious incompatibility of infant baptism with regenerate church membership. And they not only rejected infant baptism but began to establish churches of their own on the basis of believers’ baptism. Reproached for rebaptizing those already “baptized” in the established churches, they brought on antagonisms by maintaining that baptism of adult believers by immersion, as administered by themselves, was the only valid Christian baptism—the so-called baptism of infants being unworthy of the name. Particular groups held to particular doctrinal views. And Conditionalism was one of the points of contention and condemnation. CFF2 84.4