CHAPTER VIII
THE CHARACTER OF THE ANABAPTISTS
It is amazing
how many names were applied, in the period of the Reformation,
to the Baptists. They called each other brethren and sisters,
and spoke of each other in the simplest language of affection.
Their enemies called them Anabaptists because they repeated
baptism when converts came from other parties. This name
Anabaptist is a caricature. It damns first by faint praise and
then by distortion. "The opprobrious term ‘Anabaptist’ was and
is a vile slander. It was invented to conceal thought. It
shrouded in a fog the grand ideals of a people loving peace and
truth. The term is even yet a pellet of wax on the object glass
of a telescope. The tendency of history is to change front, but
the most historiographers still look at the whole question
through corrugated glass" (Griffis, the Anabaptists. In The
New World, 648. December, 1895).
They were
called Catabaptists because they denied infant baptism and
practiced immersion. The name Baptist dates from the earliest
days of the Reformation. In contemporary literature they are
generally called Baptists (Frank, Chronik, III. 198). It is an
old and honored name.
The extent of
the Baptist movement in the sixteenth century can scarcely be
exaggerated. "This malady of Anabaptism and fanaticism," says
Dorner, "had, in the third and fourth decades," that is between
1520 and 1540, "spread like a hot fever through all Germany;
from Swabia and Switzerland along the Rhine to Holland and
Friesland; from Bavaria, Middle Germany, Westphalia and Saxony,
as far as Holstein" (Dorner, Geschichte der protestantischen
Theologie, 132. Munich, 1867).
Anabaptism
represented in the sixteenth century the stream of popular
thought, feeling and aspiration, which has not ceased to flow
through the centuries. Had it not been for fierce persecutions,
which from the beginning fell upon the Baptists, in all human
probability the Reformation would have been distinctly a Baptist
movement. In that event the character of the Reformation would
have been far more thorough and spiritual, and the battle for
human liberty would not have been delayed for ages. But the
leaders of the Reformation feared for their prerogatives and the
rulers for their thrones, and these two forces combined to
defeat any show of human freedom. The masses of the people,
however, were with the Baptists.
The novelty and
boldness of the doctrines of the Baptists literally filled with
terror the rulers of the world. Many of the leaders were
scholarly men well versed in Greek and Hebrew. The wholesale
slaughter of the Peasants, in 1525, caused the spread of
Anabaptism, in the next twenty-five yeas, all over Europe.
Cities and districts which had been friendly to Luther went over
to the Anabaptists, and thousands of trades-men were to be
counted as their adherents. (Guy de Bres, Racine, Source et
Fondement des Anabaptistes, 5. Ed. 1555). The Archbishop of
Lund, Imperial Ambassador with the King of Rome wrote July 9,
1535, that while thousands of them had been killed "there is a
great quantity of this sect in several parts of Germany" (State
Papers of Venice, V.29). Albertus Hortensius writing, in 1548,
affirms: "The Anabaptists have increased with marvelous rapidity
in all places" (Hortensius, Tumultum Anabaptistarum).
Thousands were
baptized by Hubmaier, and other Baptist preachers in
Switzerland, Moravia, Germany, the Netherlands, and other
countries. Frank says:
The
course of the Baptists was so swift that their doctrine
soon spread over the whole country, and they quickly
obtained a great body of adherents, baptized many
thousands and also drew to their side many well-meaning
souls. They were thrown into prison. tortured with
branding sword, fire, water, and divers imprisonments,
so that, in a few years, some two thousand or more are
estimated to have been put to death (Franck, Chronik,
III. 198).
So much has
been said about the Baptists being turbulent and fanatical, that
it is really a surprise to many when it is found, that they were
the most peaceful of men. That there were many persons called
Anabaptists who were fanatics there is no doubt. When it is
remembered, however, that the worst of outrages were committed
against them, and that they were hunted like wild beasts, that
their women were outraged, that they were drowned in rivers and
burnt at the stake, that every means of exasperation was used
against them, we are only surprised that they were as moderate
as they were. Had the cause of these revolutionists succeeded
they would have been regarded as the most brilliant champions of
liberty, and they would have been classed among the world
patriots. Since they failed they have been counted the worst of
reprobates. It has been shown also that most of the fanatics
were not Anabaptists at all, and that the contention in which
they were engaged was far more political than religious.
The Baptists
were peace lovers and did not believe in the use of the sword.
This trait would probably describe the most of them. They were
reviled and they reviled not again, they were persecuted and
they pleaded for liberty of all. It is pleasing to note that
their true worth has been appreciated. Pierre Bayle, 1648-1706,
the learned encycloptedist, Professor of Philosophy at
Rotterdam, tells of the mild character of the Baptists, and of
their long list of martyrs. He says:
Could
it only produce those who were put to death for attempts
against the government, Its bulky martyrology would make
a ridiculous figure. But it is certain that several
Anabaptists, who suffered death courageously for
opinions, had never any intention of rebelling. Give me
leave to cite an evidence, which cannot be suspected; it
is that writer (Guy de Bres) who has exerted his whole
force in refuting this sect. He observes that its great
progress was owing to three things: The first was, ‘That
its teaching deafened its hearers with numberless
passages of Scriptures. The second, That they affected a
great appearance of sanctity. The third, That their
followers discovered great constancy in their sufferings
and death. But he does not the least hint that the
Anabaptist martyrs suffered death for taking up arms
against the state, or stirring up rebellion (Bayle,
Historical and Critical Dictionary, I 287 note).
Georgius
Cassander, who lived in those times, and disputed with the
Anabaptists and visited some of their ministers in prison, in
his Epistle to the Duke of Cleves, gives a good reputation to
the Baptists of Belgium and lower Germany. He says:
They
discover an honest and pious mind; that they erred from
the faith through mistaken zeal, rather than from evil
disposition that they condemned the outrageous behavior
of their brethren of Munster; and that they taught that
the kingdom of Jesus Christ was to be established only
by the cross. They deserve, therefore, to be pitied and
instructed, rather than to be persecuted (Cassander,
Praefat. Tractet. de Baptismo Infantium).
The Roman
Catholic Pastor at Feldsberg, A. D. 1604, says:
Among
all of the sects none have a finer appearance and a
greater external sanctity than the Anabaptist. Among
themselves they call each other brother and sister; they
curse not, they revile not, they swear not, they use no
defensive armor, and at the beginning had no weapons.
They never eat or drink immoderately, they use no
clothes that would indicate worldly pride, they have
nothing as individuals but everything in common. They do
not go to law before the magistracy and endure
every-thing in patience, as they pretend, in the Holy
Spirit. Who then would believe that under these garments
lurk pure ravening wolves?
The character
of the Swiss Baptists has the highest commendation of Erasmus.
In the time of their persecution in Basel, Erasmus lived in that
city. He remarked upon the persecuting desire of those who had
themselves just escaped from danger and declared:
They
who are so very urgent that heretics should not be put
to death. did yet capitally punish the Anabaptists, who
were condemned for much fewer articles, and were said to
have among them a great many who had been converted from
a very wicked life, to one as much amended; and who,
however, they doted on their opinions, had never
possessed themselves of any churches, or cities, or
fortified themselves by any league against the force of
princes, or cast any one out of his inheritance or
estate (Epistolarum de Erasmus, XXXI. 59. A. D. 1530).
On account of
these statements Bellarmine accused Erasmus, of being of the
Baptist persuasion. No one could express a favorable opinion of
the Baptists and escape abuse.
Dr. Schaff has
summed up his opinion of the entire movement of the Reformation.
Luther, of all the Reformers, arouses his enthusiasm. With a
patrotic interest he narrates the story of his
countryman, Zwingli. For Calvin as a theological genius he had a
high admiration, but he pronounced him to be "one who forbids
familiar approach". To Dr. Kostlin he wrote (1888): "I am now
working on the Swiss Reformation, but I cannot stir up as much
enthusiasm for Calvin or Zwingli, although he is my countryman,
as for Luther." About the same time he wrote to Dr. Mann:
The
Reformation everywhere had its defects and sins, which
it is impossible to justify. How cruel was the
persecution of the Anabaptists, who by no means were
only revolutionary fanatics but for the most part
simple, honest Christians and suffered and died for
liberty of conscience and the separation of church and
state. And how sad were the moral state and the rude
theological quarrels in Germany. No wonder that
Melanchthon longed for deliverance from the rabies
theologorum. I hope God has something better and
greater in store for His Church than the Reformation
(Schaff, The Life of Philip Schaff, 462).
Earnest and
evangelical as were the Baptists it would seem natural to
suppose that they would at least be tolerated by the government.
But their views were too radical, and their principles too far
reaching, to fail to challenge the hatred of that persecuting
era. The whole Christian world was organized upon lines of
persecution. The only exception to the rule were the Baptists.
They held that every man had a God-given right to worship God
according to the dictates of his own conscience; and the larger
right that other men had the same privilege. In this contention
they stood absolutely alone; and standing alone they paid the
price in human blood in order that every man might worship, or
not worship, God according to the dictates of his own
conscience. It was a costly sacrifice, but it was none too dear
for the world’s redemption
The entire
Christian world was engaged in persecution. The Baptists, in all
lands, both Protestant and Roman Catholic, were cruelly
persecuted by imprisonment, exile, torture, fire and sword. The
Baptists by thousands were martyred. They alone pleaded for
liberty. "The principles from which the Anabaptists proceeded,"
says Emil Egli, "manifested a powerful grasp on original
Christian ideas" (Egli, Die Zurischer Wiedcrtaufer, 94. Zurich,
1884). Their voice on the subject of liberty of conscience was
clear and distinct. Halls Muller, of Medicon, when brought
before the Zurich magistrates, said:
Do not
lay a burden on my conscience, for faith is a gift
freely from God, and is not a common property. The
mystery of God lies hidden, like the treasure in the
field, which no one can find, but he to whom the Spirit
shows it. So I beg you, ye servants of God, let my faith
stand free (Egli, 76).
Baithasar
Hubmaier, in a tract published at Schaffhausen, in Switzerland,
included the Turks and atheists in his plea for the rights of
conscience. He says:
The
burning of heretics cannot be justified by the
Scriptures. Christ Himself teaches that the tares,
should be allowed to grow with the wheat. He did not
come to burn, or to murder, but to give life, and that
more abundantly. We should, therefore, pray and hope for
improvement in men as long as they live. If they cannot
be convinced by appeals to reason, or the Word of God,
they should be let alone. One cannot be made to see his
errors either by fire or sword. But if it is a crime to
burn those who scornfully reject the Gospel of Jesus
Christ, how much more it is a crime to burn the true
expounders and exemplars of the Word of God. Such an
apparent zeal for God, the welfare of the soul, and the
honor of the church. is a deception. Indeed to every one
it must be evident that the burning of heretics is a
device of Satan (Hubmaler, Von Ketzern und verbrennen.
A. D. 1524).
The Baptists
appealed directly to the New Testament as the sole authority in
matters of religion. They at once repudiated the traditions of
the Fathers and appeals to earthly councils, and chose the
Scriptures as the rule of faith and practice. They believed in
the personal interpretation of the Word of God and that a man
must walk according to the light which is in him. An important
feature of the Baptist movement was its strange atmosphere of
Bible reading, almost to the exclusion of other literature. This
was also characteristic of the earlier evangelical movements,
but not to the same extent as among the Baptists of the
Reformation. There had been more than one translation of the
Bible into German before Luther’s time. The Baptists used with
great power their heritage of the Waldensian Bible, and they
hailed with delight Luther’s translation of the Bible. Their own
leaders, such as Hatzer and Denck, translated the Scriptures out
of the originals into the vernacular of the people. Among the
skilled artisans, journeymen and better situated peasants of the
early sixteenth century, there were not a few who could read
sufficiently to make out the text of the German Bible, whilst
those who could not read would form a circle around those who
could, and the latter, from the coigne of intellectual
advantage, would not merely read, but would often expound the
text after their own fashion to their hearers. These informal
Bible readings became one of the chief functions among Baptists
(Bax, Rise and Fall of the Anabaptists, 163-165. London, 1903).
The Baptist
movement was radical in its nature, but the baptismal question
was secondary in its importance. The movement involved the
entire reconstruction of the State Church and of much of the
social order. It was nothing less than revolutionary. The
Reformers aimed to reform the. Roman Catho1ic Church by the
Bible; the Baptists went directly to the apostolic age and
accepted the Bible alone as their rule of faith and practice.
The Reformers founded a popular State Church, including all
citizens and their families; the Baptists insisted on the
voluntary system and selected congregations of baptized
believers, separated from the world and the State (Schaff,
history of the Christian Church, VII. 72). They preached
repentance and faith, they organized congregations, and
exercised rigorous discipline. They were earnest and zealous,
self-denying and heroic. They were orthodox in the articles of
the Christian faith.
Hast says:
To
realize regeneration among men was the Anabaptist aim,
and if they failed, the noble and exalted thought which
animated them, and for which they strove, must not be
depreciated. They have deserved in this particular the
respect f an unprejudiced later age, before a thousand
others; and they seem in the choice of means to attain
this end, to have been generally worthy of respect. It
was not so much the advocacy of’. the doctrine of
regeneration that was so noticeable and characteristic
of them, but the that they held on so hard for its
realization. They stood in their conscience much higher
than the world about them, and, therefore, was not
comprehended by it. (Hast, Geschichte der Wiedertaufer.
144. Munster, 1836).
This meed of
praise by the German historian is none too high. The nature of a
church was the fundamental contention of the Baptist movement of
the Reformation.
The Baptists
could find no trace of infant baptism in the Bible, and they
denounced it as the invention of the pope and the devil.
Baptism, they reasoned, presupposes instruction, faith and
conversion, which is impossible in the case of infants.
Voluntary
baptism of adults and responsible converts is, therefore, the
only valid baptism. They denied that baptism is necessary to
salvation, and maintained that infants are, or may be, saved by
the blood of Christ without water baptism (Augsburg Confession,
Article IX). But baptism was necessary to church membership as a
sign of conversion.
From this
conception of baptism followed, as a sequence, the rebaptism of
those converts who wished to unite with the Baptists from other
bodies.
The two ideas,
a pure church of believers and the baptism of believers only,
were the fundamental articles of the Baptist creed.
The
administration of the affairs of the congregation was
exceedingly simple. Through baptism one entered into the
fellowship of the believers. Each congregation had its own
leader called teacher or pastor who was elected by the
congregation. If death or persecution removed him a new man was
immediatly elected to take his place. Besides these there were
persons selected to take care of the poor and competent persons
were sent out as missionaries. The duties of the pastor were to
warn, to teach, to pray in meetings, to institute the breaking
of bread, and to represent the church in withdrawing the hand of
fellowship. On Sunday the congregation came together to read the
Word of God, to exhort one another and to build one another up
in Christian doctrine. From time to time the Lord’s Supper,
which they termed the breaking of bread, was celebrated
(Cornelius, Geschichte des Munsterischen Aufruhrs, II. 49).
|