An On-Line Conversation re Baptists and Anabaptism

änlijch woare

Bruce Hiebert • My frustration with the term "Anabaptism" stems as much from its use as a political slogan in contemporary Mennonite institutional and social power struggles as it does from its ties to a specific historical movement that the Baptists can claim, violence and all, with as much integrity as the peace oriented Mennonites. In point of historical fact, we are descendents of Menno Simons' version of Anabaptism, not Anabaptism per se. We need to face up to and respond to that reality, not pretend that by sloganeering to the broader movement of which he was a part we have avoided the Mennonite history that comes afterward. Plus, Mennonite history, pitfalls and all, is who we are. It runs deep in our bones. If someone wants to be an Anabaptist, apocalypticism, violence, medieval anthropology and everything else that goes with it, then I welcome them to it. But let's not pretend that was a movement of peace or that it has more than the weakest connection to the contemporary Mennonite life.

Steven Wall • As I have said before, I do not understand this new Baptist claim to be connected with the Anabaptists. While there were a very few English Anabaptists, and significant interaction intellectually between English Quakers and Continental Mennonites, both the English and Scandinavian Baptists descend from completely different historical tracks than do Anabaptists. According to most authoritative church historians, the Anglo-American Baptists are actually Protestants.

Reserving the right to be wrong, especially in an area with scarce resources i.e. Minnesota, my understanding is that the Baptists were a "free church" movement that sprang from similar political and social concerns but with completely different spiritual foci. The Baptists fit in nicely with Troeltsch's historical Protestant church schematics... Anabaptists and Quakers do not, as he himself indicates.

Generally, I think we should celebrate common beliefs and learn to build bridges using those commonalities but saying that Baptists are Anabaptist because we share an adult baptism is no more pertinent than to claim that Anabaptists are Maronite Catholics because we encourage a married clergy.

On the other hand, I have watched many Mennonite churches being covertly converted to Protestant Baptism by merely celebrating those things which we believe and practice in common while ignoring the important, essential differences between our faiths and practices... especially in the areas of the priesthood of the believer, pacifist ministry, discipleship, communitarian mutuality, foot washing and the separation of church and state.

I think that the practice of hiring Baptist clergy to fill our pulpits has in general been a great mistake, not because we are being led astray by fellowshipping with the Baptists but because we are often seemingly allowing them to dominate us while we are generally forgetting who we are and our own unique witness to the world.

If our fate is to join the state church movement of Luther and Calvin, we might as well forget Dordrecht entirely and burn the Martyrs Mirror. May those who enjoy music join the Lutherans and those who seek power, join the Fundamentalists.

Obviously, I see many of our internal Mennonite struggles today not so much as internal dialogues but rather the result of American pressures to assimilate and join the Protestants as either high church intellectuals or low church Fundamentalists... neither of which is completely contrary to Anabaptism per se but neither of which is Anabaptist either.

I guess in the end, I ponder the question as to why Baptists want to be us... but wonder if the deeper question is why we seem to be so uncomfortable to ourselves be whom we have been called by Christ to be -- that is, to be ourselves as Anabaptists. Are Baptists trying to be us while we are secretly wanting to assimilate and be Baptists (or Lutherans)?