The Radical Reformation

ANABAPTISTS

During the sixteenth century there arose groups of Christian people who felt that the work of reformation was only half done by Luther, Calvin, Zwingli and their followers. Though they appreciated the evangelical truths which these reformers had recovered, they were dissatisfied with the way in which the principles were applied. They detected a reluctance to apply biblical principles fearlessly to every area of human life. While appreciating the reality of justification by faith, for example, these “Anabaptists,” as they were inaccurately called, wanted to hear more about radical Christian discipleship and concrete social righteousness. At the time, the movement was regarded as a subversive, fanatical sect, bent upon overturning the gains of the reformation. In actual fact, they only wanted the reformation carried through in all its dimensions. The savage persecutions which were carried out against them represent a sad and shameful chapter in the history of the church. But the vision of radical, biblical Christianity which these Anabaptists held high has not died.

It is now generally recognised that we owe to this movement some of the great principles which are taken for granted today: freedom of conscience, separation of church and state, and voluntarism in religion. These Anabaptists were the first to enunciate them clearly, and against considerable opposition from the “conservative reformation” which was deficient precisely at these points. But the essential vision of the radical reformation was even greater than this. For these men dared to believe that the strong ethical teachings of Jesus Christ could and should be carried out by his followers. It was no good to lay emphasis on “faith alone” if it was not accompanied by the evidences of regeneration. The problem is highlighted in Luther’s rejection of James as a strawy epistle. Ironically enough, it was precisely the message of that epistle which the new Protestant churches needed in order to overcome nominal Christianity and worldly living.

THE ESSENCE OF CHRISTIANITY

Basic to the vision of the radical reformation was the conception of the essence of Christianity as discipleship. A truly Christian life is not merely a life delivered from the condemnation of sin but one that is seriously patterned after the teaching and example of Jesus. Profession of faith is useless if not accompanied in a person with genuine repentance and transformed conduct. Even justification by faith, that noble prize of the reformation, can be nothing more than “an angelic form to cover over all the license of the flesh” (Hubmaier). The Anabaptists could not accept a religion which makes regeneration a matter of intellect or emotion, and not a matter of transformed behavior. They demanded an outward expression of the inner experience. True repentance must be evidenced by newness of life. For that reason the great word of the Anabaptists was not “faith” as it was with Luther but discipleship or “following” (nachfolge Christi). They were more interested in a testimony which was a pledge to obey Christ without reservation, than one in which the excitement of some past experience was rehearsed. And one must say in retrospect that these Christians not only proclaimed the ideal of radical Christian discipleship but also achieved a measurably higher level of performance on average than other branches of the reformation at that time. Even their bitter enemies were compelled to admit that their lives were pious and beyond reproach. In summary, the radical reformation refused to define Christianity as Roman Catholics had done as a matter of receiving divine grace through a sacramental institution, or as the Lutherans were doing as the enjoyment of the inner experience of God’s grace through faith in Christ. They saw at the heart of the Christian message God’s desire to transform human life through discipleship. To them it was unthinkable for one to be a Christian and not live a new quality of life based upon divine principles.

THE CROSS, THE LOVE, AND NON-RESISTANCE

As for the content of discipleship, the radical reformation believed that the way of the cross ought to be followed in human affairs. They took seriously what Peter wrote, “Christ suffered for you, leaving you an example, that you should follow in his steps.” Evangelicals today need to be reminded that we are not only to receive the cross, and experience the cross, but also to bear the cross. The Anabaptists knew what costly grace was in distinction to cheap grace. When Jesus was surrounded by curious and half-interested crowds, he said, “If a man would come after me, let him deny him self and take up his cross and follow me.” He told them about the cost of discipleship and insisted that they take it into account before being committed to him. The way of the cross, the utter abandoning of self, is the vision we need to recover again in our day. If the cross were the criterion of our behavior the problems of materialism and war would vanish for us. We would be possessed with the love of Christ, and take delight in obeying God and serving the neighbour’s needs. It is the vision of “faith working through love” as Paul said.

Jesus does not leave the matter of obedience in broad generalities. He is painfully specific. Discipleship means we are to love our enemies no matter what they do to us. We are to seek even their good. The other cheek is to be turned. Nonresistance arises out of the criterion of the cross which means a willingness to suffer in the face of evil, a determination to overcome evil with good. The radical reformation saw clearly that Christ came to bring in a kingdom of peace in which swords are to be beaten into ploughshares and from which all violence is excluded. The Anabaptists believed that a Christian man should have no part in war, violence or the taking of human life. It is well to remember that in the sixteenth century, when the Anabaptists arose, Catholics and Protestants alike not only condoned warfare as an instrument of government policy, but actually employed it themselves in religious conflicts. In a day of weapons of mass destruction and unimaginable horror, the wisdom of abandoning war is much more obvious than it was then. It is tragic that even now so many Christians are blind to the savagery of all militarism, “theirs and ours,” and still cannot hear what Jesus is saying to us all. One of the most urgent items of business on the agenda of evangelical Christianity is a clearcut repudiation of war and “deterrence” as incompatible with the ethic of the gospel.

A COLONY OF HEAVEN

The radical reformation, when it thought about a radical Christian life-style, did not think in individualistic terms only. It thought in terms of a brotherhood, a new community, in whose midst the full Christian ethic might be socially expressed. The church, the body of Christ, was to be like a colony of settlers from another country, planted in a strange land, for the purpose of bringing to it the challenge of God’s kingdom. They did not see the church primarily as an institution as in Catholicism, nor as an instrument for proclaiming the Word as in Lutheranism, nor as a resource group for individual piety as in Pietism. The radical reformation sees the church as a brotherhood of believers among whom the ethical implications of the gospel would be fleshed out. Sad to say, the level of consistent Christian behaviour amongst the churches of the conservative reformation was low. Nominal Christianity was widespread. The major reformers decided that it was better to include the masses of people in the church rather than form a much smaller fellowship of serious Christians only. The anabaptists refused to compromise in this way. They even preferred martyrdom to the yielding of principle. Church membership was based on true conversion and involved a commitment to holy living and serious discipleship. Even their objection to infant baptism did not rest on any theory that children could not experience God’s prevenient grace. They reserved it for adults because only they could make the kind of intelligent life commitment which Jesus requires.

In this understanding of the church as a radical, counter-cultural community lies the Anabaptist strategy of social change. They did not expect to change society from the top down, as liberals today often believe. They believed change would come about, if at all, when communities of people began living changed lives. They simply insisted, amid much ridicule, on living “as in the Day,” that is, according to the values of God’s society to come, rather than the standards of this present world. In short, they recovered the Bible’s ethical incentive which is based on eschatology. They had a hope for the world which was not derived from it, and which enabled them to challenge the status quo fearlessly and effectively. They refused to be defined by the present state of affairs in society, but insisted on living on the basis of the new possibilities Jesus offered them. The Christian message is the most revolutionary of all.

CONCLUSION

There is so much that we can learn from our brothers in the radical reformation tradition. These men have been the Elijahs and Jeremiahs of modern times, preaching the Word in the midst of an evil generation. They did not flinch from applying the truth where it was difficult and dangerous to do so. We admire their courage. We are all in their debt.

Evangelical theology is in danger of presenting an inadequate picture of Jesus Christ to the world. We have pictured him as a comforter, friend, anchor, rock; but not as one who, as he is presented in the gospels, challenges, disturbs, and upsets us. Of course we must insist against liberal theology that a man must confront the risen Lord of the church in a personal act of faith. But we must not domesticate the Christ whom men must meet. He will not be our savior if he cannot be our Lord. The work of the radical reformation remains to be fulfilled.

Clark H. Pinnock was a contributing editor of the Post American and professor of systematic theology at McMaster Divinity College in Hamilton, Ontario when this article appeared.