Quaker Anabaptists?

American Quaker William Penn

    I was a bit startled a couple of weeks ago to read an essay about Evangelical Christianity’s “more progressive and more contemplative Anabaptist cousin, Quakerism.”  Stranger still, the author of the article was not only Quaker but a graduate of George Fox, a leading Quaker university.

    First the Southern Baptists are now Anabaptists and now the Quakers are coming home?  What’s going on here?  What’s next? – Will the Amish again admit to being kith and kin with the Mennonites?

    Consumed by debates between Mennonites and Amish on the traditional American side, and between traditional Mennonites and ethnic Mennonites amongst the Russländer, the Quakers have generally been pushed off the historic Anabaptist table. 

Guide to a forgotten heritage

Notes on Ursula Franklin's Pacifism as a Map

From her [Ursula Franklin] I learned of the Quaker focus on the importance of individual conscience-based decision-making, not only when it comes to the choices of daily living, but also in acting on the most momentous national and global issues.  Quakers do not apply dogmatic instruction to life’s questions.  Rather, they use a collective process of prayer, study, and discernment to guide their decisions” Swenarchuk, Michelle p 2

In this sense, the Bruderthaler may have actually reverted back to an older form of Anabaptism back to the time when they were natural allies of the Quaker movement in Europe. 

  In a sense, the old weltenshauung revealed more of a difference in engagement and organization than in either lifestyle or theology.  While it is possible that these movements have evolved into irreconcilable strains, it is probably not necessary to determine whether today’s movements continue to hold commonalities but rather earlier forms of the belief systems did.  Nor might one really argue that the actual influence was exceedingly strong as both movements moved along their historical paths – such being that the Quakers were never an overly influential sect in either the Germanies or Russia.  Yet, as cousins of the earlier movements, they might indicate what is possible and demonstrate what in evolution would be referred to as parallel and convergent evolutionary traits rather than merely evolutionary relay tendencies (environmental rather than genetic) (see Gould).

  While one does not find Quakers per se on the Anabaptist family tree – they may or may not be closer to Anabaptists and Puritans than they are to other movements.  Both Puritans and Quakers would at least indicate shared ancestors with the Anabaptists – for the Puritans – the Speedwell Pilgrims and for the Quakers – the Anabaptists who sheltered in London and possibly Scotland during the reign of Henry VIII.

  “Given that they reject participation in war and the use of violence for any cause, Quakers are committed to an active engagement in the pursuit of peace and justice.  They consider that non-violent means provide “a positive witness to a better way,” (Swenarchuk, p. 4).

  From this description, there in fact appears to be a similarity between contemporary Quakerism and the sort of Pacifism as promulgated by the MCC since the 1960s.  Interestingly also for our purposes is the 1976 writing by the MCC indicating the development of “Evangelical” Quakerism.

  Importantly – Ursula Franklin (and Corrie ten Boom) spent time in Nazi Concentration Camps – exempting her teachings from having to defend herself in the “Nazi” paradigm.  She lived it – there can be no theoretical judgment. 

  The goal of Ursula Franklin’s practice of pacifism is to contribute to building a society of peace, justice, and equality for all “step by bloody small step.” (Swenarchuk, p 5)

  “To Ursula, peace ‘is not so much the absence of war but the presence of justice.  Peace is the absence of fear,’ whether it a fear of “the knock on the door at night,” a fear of hunger, unemployment, or danger to our children, or a lack of “a public sphere in which the issues of peace and justice will have priority over the issues of profit.’  Peace is ‘a commitment to the future,” and it is a necessity for an equal society in which people have control over much of their own lives.

  Peace requires justice, the “hinge of a civilized society,” and can only be achieved through ‘the persistent application of social truth and justice and the strong and intelligent application of love.’  Both peace and justice are individual.  They must be equally attainable for one’s loved ones and allies and for ‘all the people you cannot stand.’ The unconstrained practice of justice is the price of peace.  ‘If you want peace, work for justice.’  Ursula envisions a peaceful world in which society would work somewhat like a potluck supper, where everyone can contribute their work and care and in return receive nourishment and friendship.  For a successful potluck supper, a diversity of offerings is essential,” (Swenarchuk…)

    Point of historical interest – the Friends would in fact receive the 1947 Nobel Peace Prize for their work in rebuilding war-time societies devastated by war.

Evangelicals, Mennonites and the MCC

Dialogue on Peace with Non-Mennonites   MCC World Report, 1976, p. 122 - 123

courtesy of Mennonite Church Historical Archives, Goshen, Indiana

    One of the striking phenomena of 1976 on the US church scene has been the rising visibility of Christians identifying themselves as Evangelical.  All of the evangelicals have in common an explicit emphasis on the Bible as the source of their authority and direction.  But with that the similarities cease.  One type of emerging evangelicalism is represented fairly typically by the Campus Crusade style of evangelistic activity.  This movement is characterized by ‘God and country’ mentality, an individualized and spiritualized definition of the Kingdom of God and more interest in doctrinal than discipleship questions.

  Another emerging form of evangelicalism is characterized by the Sojourners’ style with an emphasis on the church’s duty to stand outside of and critique the state, an understanding of the Kingdom of God which encompasses as well as individual aspects of life and an examination of the hard sayings of Jesus about discipleship.  Peace Section (US) has  maintained some dialog with representatives of this latter type of evangelicalism where it finds great interest in the Anabaptist point of view.  A cooperative adventure is emerging with Evangelicals for Social Action in Philadelphia where a VS couple will have a shared assignment under Evangelicals for Social Action and Peace Section (US).  The possibilities for extending a peace witness in this direction are great.

  Another striking development in 1976 has been the emergence of New Call to Peacemaking.  This is an initiative which comes from the evangelical Quakers who have been feeling they need to rediscover the peace testimony and base it solidly on a scriptural foundation.  They have taken steps during the past two years to dialog with other Quakers about this and in the spring of 1976 the Mennonites and Brethren were invited to join.  A Central Planning Committee made [up of] 15 persons -- five representatives from each of the three historic peace churches -- has been formed and has met twice.  A series of regional conferences across the United States during 1977 will be followed by a national conference in October 1978 at Great Lake, Wisconsin.  Each historic peace church will send 75 delegates to the national conference.  It is the goal of New Call to Peacemaking to articulate a united voice from the historic peace churches bearing testimony to the way of peace in a very militarized nation and world.

    We are in correspondence also with Christians from the more ecumenical perspective and consider it part of the opportunity and duty of MCC Peace Section (US) to be in dialog with Christians all across the confessional spectrum.

Are We an Ethnicity or a Religion?

    Does the term Mennonite refer to a religion or to an ethnicity?  This question regarding religion versus culture assumes greater significance as those who self-identify as Mennonite increasingly move away from their traditional clusters of farms, congregations, and colonies.  People have coined many terms to deal with this question -- Patrick Friesen, the noted poet and teacher of Mennonite descent, refers to himself as a “Recovering Mennonite.”  Many of my fellow Mennonite students at Georgetown University, a well-known Jesuit university of the Catholic faith, referred to themselves not as Mennonites but as having Mennonite grandparents -- in the same manner that Philip Landis, the controversial “Mennonite” cyclist, would later identify himself not as Mennonite but as of Mennonite descent.  In a former Mennonite Brethren church in Minneapolis, Minnesota -- we all celebrated one communion and a single fellowship, but identified ourselves as Bruderthaler-Mennonite, Old Mennonite, General Conference Mennonite, Hutterite, and Mennonite Brethren -- all the same, but all different.  Obviously, we retained distinct cultural differences -- the proverbial alphabet soup of Mennonite identities, that had no affect whatsoever on our shared spiritual understanding.  In an informal conversation, Carolyn Fauth, a Mennonite journalist and historian from Lustre, Montana, shared in conversation that until the 1940s, you could tell the Mennonite groups of Lustre-Volt apart by the pattern of ribbons on the bonnets worn by the women -- the Bruderthaler, the Mennonite Brethren, and the General Conference women all ascribed to a distinct style.  Furthermore, you use the same criteria to distinguish between the Old Mennonite churches, the Amish Mennonites, and the Hutterites.  Yet, I am aware of no written understanding that any of the Mennonites ever believed that God preferred or mandated a specific pattern for bonnets in His Church (though I am aware of stories where certain hairstyles and clothing fasteners are mandated by formal church instruction).  Though originally grounded in a religious understanding, many of these practices would seem to have become cultural norms and traditions rather than religious dogma.