means of seducing sects, as I am accused.” — McClintock and Strong, Cyclopedia of Biblical, Theological, and Ecclesiastical Literature, article, “Menno, Simon.”
He renounced one Roman Catholic doctrine after another as he continued to study the New Testament in his attempt to save his own church members who were dissatisfied with the Catholic Church from falling into the errors of the Munsterites.
“The great and gracious Lord,”
he said,
“extended to me His Fatherly Spirit, help, and mighty hand, so that I freely abandoned at once my character, honor, and fame, which I had among men, as also my antichristian abominations, mass, infant baptism, loose and careless life, and all, and put myself willingly in all trouble and poverty under the pressing cross of Christ my Lord.” — Ibid.
For a time he attempted to preach his new doctrines from the Catholic pulpit, but finding that impossible, he voluntarily relinquished his parish at Witmarsum, and about a year later some Anabaptists at Groningen invited him to become their public teacher.
In order to understand better Menno’s relationship to that sect, a brief account of their history may be in place, although they are deserving of a far more amplified one than can here be given. First it should be stated that it is somewhat difficult to arrive at truth about them, for much of what has been written concerning the members comes from prejudiced sources.
Nearly all historians permit their annals of the Anabaptists to be tainted by the actions of the Munsterites.
During the sixteenth century there existed as many as five different
varieties of Anabaptists, and some say eleven; but for the present purpose two divisions will suffice, the moderate and the fanatical.
The moderate, or sensible, type maintained that they were the lineal descendants of the medieval Waldenses, an assertion which is probably correct; it is also possible that their immediate origin was the fruit of Zwingli’s early efforts in Switzerland, when that Reformer, along with
Luther and others, taught that nothing was to be accepted as Christian doctrine but what was found in the Bible. At the time some of his hearers in Zurich asked Zwingli for a Scripture text authorizing infant baptism.
At first Zwingli temporized, but finally he estranged himself from the group. Concerning the doctrine of infant baptism, one historian reports,
“Nearly all of the leading Reformers were for a time brought face to face with the fact that infant baptism is without clear, Scriptural authorization, but were ultimately led to defend it as a practical necessity.” — Albert H. Newman, A Manual of Church History, vol. 2 p. 153.
Charles Beard remarked,
“Baptism of the believing individual was the logical outcome of justification by faith.” — The Reformation of the Sixteenth Century in Its Relation to Modern Thought and Knowledge, page 189.
The group at Munster represented the fanatical fringe. They taught that the millennium would soon appear, and with John of Leyden at their head they attempted to set up God’s kingdom on earth. After they gained control of the city they proceeded to cast out the magistrates and slaughter the ungodly, probably in retaliation for the murdering in cold blood by the Catholics of numerous Anabaptists. Lutherans and Catholics alike fled the city. Munster was now termed the New Jerusalem. It is incontrovertibly true that polygamy was declared by John of Leyden to be the law of the kingdom, “the one dark stain on the Anabaptists of Munster.” (See Thomas M. Lindsay, A History of the Reformation, vol. 2, pp. 430-469, for an account of the Munsterites.) One may here be tempted to draw a parallel between the polygamy of John of Leyden and the bigamy of the Lutheran prince Philip of Hesse, the latter’s violation of marital sanctity condoned by Luther, Melanchthon, and Bucer.
The city was besieged, but more than a year elapsed before it fell, to be followed by a horrible massacre which spread to the whole territory of Anabaptists, all doubtless innocent of the sins committed within the city.
Thousands were executed, many by drowning, which was considered to be a fitting punishment for their heresy of “believers’” baptism.
From that time to the present the stigma attached to the Mun-sterites has been affixed to all Anabaptists, regardless of how mild-mannered or soundly Biblical they might be, so much so as to make present-day Baptists deny any connection with them, although they are reputed to be their direct lineal descendants.
A few authors have, however, come to the defense of the sober Anabaptists and of the doctrines they taught. Beard stated,
“They had a grasp of principles which, as time advances, are destined to play an ever-greater part in the development of religious thought and life. Theirs were the truths which the Reformation neglected and cast out, but which it must again reconcile with itself if it is ever to complete the work.”
— Op. cit., p. 187.
Another historian remarked,
“That they were as a party guilty of the charges brought against them,. . .is untrue. As a class they were as holy in life as their persecutors; and their leaders, in Biblical knowledge and theological acumen, were no mean antagonists..The fanatical Anabaptists were universally taken as typical, and to this day when Anabaptism is mentioned it is supposed to be equivalent of absurd interpretation of Scripture, blasphemous assumption, and riotous indecency.
Munster was, however, only the culminating point of fanaticism engendered by persecution, and Anabaptism in itself, strictly interpreted, is not responsible for it.” — The New Schaff-Herzog Encyclopedia of Religious Knowledge, article, “Anabaptists.”
Menno regarded unsympathetically the state of affairs at Munster; in fact, in a written statement he censured John of Leyden severely for his
outlandish beliefs and vile practices.
Convinced that the group that had called him to preach at Groningen was free from the fanaticism of the Munsterites, Menno accepted their invitation. He was rebaptized at Leeuwarden. About this time he also married and later became the father of several children. At Groningen he was ordained as an elder, or bishop, in the Old Evangelical, or Waldensiam church. He was recognized as their leader from the time of the Bockholt
Congress in 1536, and from that date the moderate group assumed the name of Mennonites.
Not content to live a life of ease and seclusion, he took as his great aim the organization of the scattered members of Anabaptists into one body. Now began the most eventful part of his career. He spent much time traveling, and for twenty-five years after he renounced the priesthood he worked indefatigably, anxious to make converts. He crisscrossed the Netherlands repeatedly and traveled over Germany. His success was phenomenal as he gathered a vast number of followers, who assembled by the thousands in East Friesland, under the regency of the Protestant-sympathizing
Countess Anna, practically the only spot left on the European continent where the Anabaptists were not persecuted.
From 1543 to 1545 Menno had his headquarters at Cologne, where he received the protection of the elector, Hermann von Wied; but with the elector’s overthrow Menno was forced to seek other quarters. He removed to Wismar, where he remained for nine years, working in the East Sea area.
Finally he settled at Oldesloe, Holstein, where he succeeded in establishing a printing press for the dissemination of his views.
About his work Menno wrote,
“Through our feeble service, teaching, and simple writing, with the careful deportment, labor, and help of our faithful brethren, the great and mighty God has made so known and public, in many cities and lands, the word of true repentance, the word of His grace and power, together with the wholesome use of His holy
sacraments, and has given such growth to His churches, and endued them with such invincible strength, that not only many proud, stout hearts have become humble, the impure chaste, the drunken temperate, the covetous liberal, the cruel kind, the godless godly, but also, for the testimony which they bear, they faithfully give up their property to confiscation, and their bodies to torture and to death; as has occurred again and again to the present hour.” — McClintock and Strong, Cyclopedia, article, “Menno, Simon.”
Menno complained bitterly that it was his lot, along with his followers, to be persecuted, to stand in constant jeopardy of his life, while the priests
took their ease, made themselves merry, and enjoyed the weddings and the baptisms. He said,
“Instead of being greeted by all as doctors and masters, we must be called Anabaptists, clandestine holders-forth, deceivers, and
heretics. In short, while for their services they are rewarded in princely style, with great emoluments and good days, our reward and portion must be fire, sword, and death.” — Ibid.
The Anabaptists had more martyrs than had any other sect. Lindsay reported that they
“were subjected to persecutions, especially from the Romanists and the Lutherans, much more harsh than befell any of the religious parties of the sixteenth century.” — Op. cit., p. 445.
Menno spent the close of his life under the patronage of Baron von Ahlefeldt, and he died in peace at Oldesloe, sometime between 1559 and 1561, after having found time to amass a considerable fortune as well as a prodigious following.
The key doctrine of the Anabaptists is that baptism should be
administered only to those who had expressed their faith in Christ as their Redeemer. Naturally this eliminated infant baptism. But baptism of believers was not necessarily observed by immersion; they practiced sprinkling, immersion, and pouring, the last method primarily advocated by Menno. That is the method followed by the Mennonites to this day.
Concerning this rite Menno taught:
“We are not regenerated because we have been baptized,. . . but we are baptized because we have been regenerated by faith and the word of God.” — Quoted in The Converted Catholic Magazine, January, 1949.
Other tenets included unlawfulness of oaths, wars, lawsuits, capital punishment, and divorce, except for adultery. They excluded magistrates from the church and discouraged holding public office, but the civil
government was to be obeyed in all things except that especially forbidden by Scriptural teaching. They believed that Christ would reign personally for a thousand years at the millennium. To them human science was
useless, if not harmful, to the Christian, and they were the first to advocate separation of church and state so that there might be complete religious freedom.
Another phase of their practices included communion of goods, at least to the extent where they considered their belongings subject to Christian generosity. The churches were composed exclusively of professed believers, the truly regenerate, whom only they admitted to the Lord’s Supper. They followed the practice of foot washing as Christ washed His disciples’ feet.
They also believed in “soul sleep,” that is, the doctrine that the dead know not anything from the time of death until the judgment. Insisting on the freedom of the will, the necessity of good works as the fruits of faith, they emphasized following Christ’s pattern of life, His work and suffering. On the holiness of the Christian life Menno wrote,
“True evangelical faith is of such a nature that it cannot be
workless or idle; it ever manifests its powers. For as it is the nature of fire to produce nothing but heat and flame, of the sun nothing but light and heat, of water moisture, and a good tree fruit after its natural properties, so also true evangelical faith brings forth true evangelical fruit, in accordance with its true, good, evangelical nature.” — Ibid.
They laid even more stress on discipline than on doctrine. Luxurious living, earthly comfort, personal adornment, social enjoyment, amassing possessions — all these they condemned. They walked circumspectly before God and men and succeeded in gaining the good will of at least some of the civil authorities.
Menno’s strong characteristic was his insistence upon discipline. He forbade his followers from associating with members of other churches and insisted upon excommunicating those who listened to sermons by
Lutheran ministers. He contended that the marriage bonds be dissolved when one of the marital parties was an unbeliever, and meted out
excommunication if any departed, even in a slight degree, from principles of dress as laid down by the church.
Such strictness led to dissension and division among the ranks, as did his finespun theory concerning the incarnation. He taught that Christ was born in but not of Mary, thereby negating the human nature of the Son of God.
He spent much time in controversy, and his insistence upon expulsion of all who were guilty of disobedience, however slight, led to at least two divisions, “die Groben” and “die Feinen,” and perhaps three: the most liberal, intermediate, and the least liberal.
As the result of this disagreement a great conference of German
Anabaptists was held in 1555, in Strasbourg, where to Menno’s sorrow and chagrin this conclave disapproved of his doctrine of incarnation and his disciplinary measures, but he would not be turned aside from his purpose.
That Menno was a mild-mannered, modest, pious man is attested to by the fact that when John Laski, determined to make a Reformed church member of him, engaged him in a three-to-four-day public controversy on infant baptism, Christ’s humanity, and the function of the ministry, Menno’s Christlike spirit convinced Laski that Menno was a really pious man; and the two separated in peace with promises of good will toward each other.
Menno’s influence upon the Reformation, as well as that of his followers, came not so much as the result of any doctrines he propounded but rather from the principle of godly living they set before the world. He
“gave birth to the ideal of separation of church and state, of toleration and freedom of conscience, of high moral and social ideals, of the preaching and practice of peace, of the supreme sovereignty of Christ over His own in this worldly world of ours
— all ideals far in advance of their day.” — Ibid.