Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-gb8f7 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-27T20:28:48.520Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

The Place of Tradition in Dutch Anabaptism

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  28 July 2009

Cornelius J. Dyck
Cornelius J. Dyck
Affiliation:
professor of historical theology in The Associated Mennonite Biblical Seminaries, Elkhart, Indiana.
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

There is little doubt that biblical literalism was a characteristic of the main stream of sixteenth-century Anabaptism. By biblical literalism is not meant a wooden, proof-texting, legalistic understanding of every word of the Bible, but a conviction that the plain meaning of scripture could be understood by any sincere Christian, and ought to be obeyed. The Protestant reformers Luther, Zwingli, Calvin and Bucer also made the Bible central to their reforming efforts. In a sense this might even be said about the intentions of the Council of Trent. Yet differing hermeneutics and socio-political presuppositions led to vastly different ecclesiastical results. Recent Reformation historiography, particularly in eastern Europe, rightly reminds us of the importance of the social and economic factors involved, but hermeneutics remains a vital part of the dynamic of that period, as of all church history, and must be central to contemporary efforts to overcome the legacy of ecclesiastical fragmentation which that area left us.

Type
Research Article
Information
Church History , Volume 43 , Issue 1 , March 1974 , pp. 34 - 49
Copyright
Copyright © American Society of Church History 1974

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

1. See, for example, Paul Peachey, “Marxist Historiography of the Radical Reformation: Causality or Covariation?” and Friesen, Abraham, “The Marxist Interpretation of Anabaptism,” in Meyer, Carl S., ed. Sixteenth Century Essays and Studies (St. Louis: The Foundation for Reformation Research, 1970) 1:1–16 and 17–34 respectively.Google Scholar

2. Quoted in Horsch, John, “The Faith of the Swiss Brethren,” The Mennonite Quarterly Review (hereafter MQR) 4 (10 1930): 260.Google Scholar

3. Quoted in Horsch, John, Mennonite History, Volume 1: Mennonites in Europe (Scottdale: Mennonite Publishing House, 1950), p. 350.Google Scholar

4. Quoted in Littell, Franklin H., “The Anabaptist Concept of the Church,” in Hershberger, Guy F., ed., Recovery of the Anabaptist Vision (Scottdale: Herald Press, 1957), p. 120.Google Scholar

5. See Littell, Franklin H., The Anabaptist View of the Church (Boston: Starr King Press, 1958), pp. 48ff.Google Scholar Also Littell, , “Primitivismus,” in Littell, Franklin H. and Walz, Hans H., eds., Welt-Kirchen-Lesikon (Stuttgart: Kreuz-Verlag, 1960), pp. 1182–1187,Google Scholar Also Bainton, Roland H., “Changing Ideas and Ideals in the Sixteenth Century,” Journal of Modern History 8 (12 1936):417–443.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

6. For an extended discussion of terminology see Congar, Yves M. J., Tradition and Traditions (New York: The Macmillan Co., 1967).Google Scholar

7. Zuck, Lowell H. has argued that Anabaptist eschatology was no less violent than Thomas Müntzer and Münster, 1535, except that God himself would be the agent, in “Anabaptist Revolution Through the Covenant in Sixteenth Century Continental Protestantism” (Ph.D. diss., Yale University, 1954).Google Scholar

8. The development of early Catholic understanding of traditions as that which was from the beginning clearly defined and knowable may be traced best in the writings of Irenaeus and Tertullian, but also in the Shepherd of Hermas, Vincent of Lerin and others.

9. See Bainton. Also Wray, Frank J., “The Anabaptist Doctrine of the Restitution of the Church,” MQR 28 (07 1954):186–196Google Scholar and Meihuizen, Hendrik W., “The Concept of Restitution in the Anabaptism of Northwestern Europe,” MQR 44 (04 1970): 141–158.Google Scholar

10. In Hillerbrand, Hans J., “Anabaptism and History,” MQR 45 (04 1971):107–122, especially p. 112.Google Scholar

11. Ibid., p. 119.

12. Meihuizen.

13. Bibliotheca Reformatoria Neerlandica (hereafter BRN), eds. Cramer, S. and Pijper, F. (The Hague: Martinus Nijhoff, 1903–1914), 10:202.Google Scholar

14. Ibid., p. 228.

15. Ibid., p. 95. Also The Complete Writings of Menno Simons (hereafter CWMS), ed. Wenger, J. C. (Scottdale: Herald Press, 1956), pp. 53ff.Google Scholar For further discussion of this issue see Keeney, William E., The Development of Dutch Anabaptist Thought and Practice From 1539–1564 (The Hague: B. de Graaf, 1968), pp. 73ff.Google Scholar

16. BRN 10:300.

17. Ibid., p. 318.

18. Kuehler, W. J., Geschiedenis der Nederlandsche Doopsgezinden in de Zestiende Eeuw (Haarlem: H. D. Tjeenk Willink & Zoon, 1961), pp. 58, 177.Google Scholar Keeney, p. 73, cited from Guy, de Bres, La Racine Source et Fondement des Anabaptistes Ou Rebaptises de Notre Temps (1565), p. 106.Google Scholar The reference is to Matthew 10:27.

19. CWMS, p. 305.

20. Ibid., p. 214.

21. Ibid., p. 138.

22. Ibid., p. 160. We note the absolute primacy of Scripture over all things, including human relationships.

23. Ibid., p. 312.

24. BRN 10:375.

25. Littell, , Anabaptist View, chapter 3.Google Scholar

26. Keeney, pp. 45ff.

27. See also Paul, Peachey, “Anabaptism and Church Organization,” MQR 30 (07 1956): 213–228.Google Scholar

28. CWMS, p. 65.

29. BRN 7:528–529. Kuehler, pp. 292, 300ff. de Hoop Scheffer, J. G., “Oude Gemeenteverordeningen,” Doopsgezinde Bijdragen (1877), pp. 62–93.Google Scholarvan der Zijpp, N., Geschiedenis der Doopsgezinden in Nederland (Arnhem: Van Loghum Slaterus, 1952), pp. 52ff.Google Scholar

30. CWMS, p. 173.

31. BRN 10:224.

32. CWMS, pp. 440ff.

33. Ibid., p. 165.

34. Ibid., p. 644.

35. Ibid., p. 159. See BRN 10:207ff., 532ff.

36. BRN 10:212.

37. BRN 10:233.

38. It may be that Menno and Dirk's harsh practice of church discipline, for example, was an extension of the penitential discipline of Roman Catholicism, or a reaction against the inadequacy of that discipline. Or perhaps it arose out of personal guilt, or the fact that Menno was 40 years old when he became an Anabaptist. Or perhaps the fact that all men hated them led to where the Anabaptists began to hate themselves and harsh discipline was one of the signs.

39. BRN 7:130.

40. For a comprehensive discussion see Penner, Archie, “Pieter Jansz. Twisck: Sesond Generation Anabaptist Mennonite Churchman, Writer, and Polemicist” (Ph.D. diss., The University of Iowa, 1971).Google Scholar

41. Ibid. Also Jansz, Pieter. Twisck, Tractaet Van Den Houwelijcken Staet (1627) (Hoorn: Jan Jansz. Deutel, 1682), pp. 140ff.Google Scholar See BRN 7:223ff.

42. CWMS, p. 138.

43. Ibid., p. 972.

44. Chronica, Zeitbuch Und Geschichtsbibel (Strasbourg, 1531), p. 191.Google Scholar

45. de Hoop Scheffer, J. G., Inventaris der Archiefstukken … (Amsterdam: Door den Kerkeraad, 1883), No. 466Google Scholar (hereafter Archief). See BRN 7, 69ff. -and Kuehier, pp. 428, 433.

46. Ontdeckinge der Dwalingen (Hoorn: J. J. van Rijn, 1627), p. 176.Google Scholar

47. Ibid., p. 263.

48. Ibid., p. 201.

49. Ibid., p. 40. See “Short Confession of Faith” (1609), Art. 19, Trans. in Dyck, Cornelius J., “Hans de Ries: Theologian and Churchman: A Study in Second Generation Dutch Anabaptism” (Ph. D. diss., The University of Chicago, 1962), p. 298.Google Scholar

50. Onideckinge, p. 124. The common name given to Anabaptists in the Netherlands was not Mennonites but Doopsgezinden, literally meaning baptism-minded. Most of them, including Hans de Ries, did not wish to be called after the name of a man. Some of the conservative groups, however, did call themselves after Menno. The term Menist was frequently used by outsiders.

51. Lietboeck, inhoudende Schriftuurlijcke Vermaen Liederen… (Rotterdam: D. Mullum, 1582)Google Scholar. And Historie der Martelare ofte waerachtighe Getuygen Jesu Christi (Haarlem: Daniel Keyser, 1615).Google Scholar

52. Hans de Ries' reply to Simon Jacobs, Archief, e 864.

53. Historie der Martelare, p. 2.

54. De Ries was deeply troubled over the tensions in the Reformed Church at the time of his writing, tensions which culminated in the fratricidal events of the Synod of Dort, 1618–1619. Substantial numbers of Reformed members joined the Waterlanders after the Synod.

55. Quoted in Peachey, , “Anabaptism and Church Organization,” p. 218.Google Scholar

56. CWMS, p. 259.

57. Tegen de Pausselijcke Successie (Hoorn: Zacharias Cornelisz., 1636).Google Scholar

58. Ibid., p. 3.

59. Ibid. p. 29.

60. Ibid., p. 78.

61. “The Last Booke of John Smith,” in Walter H. Burgess, John Smith The Se-Baptist, Thomas Helwys And The First Baptist Church in England (London: James Clarke & Co., 1911), p. 262.Google Scholar

62. “A Confession of Faith,” Art. 81, in Ibid., p. 254.

63. Successio Apostolica: dat is, Naecominghe oft de naetredinghe der Apostelen, waer in dat die bestaet, nae dat ghetuyghenisse der H. Schriftueren door J. P. v. M. Phil. 3:17, 18, 19 (Tot Alcmaer. Ghedruckt by Jacob de Meester, 1600).Google Scholar

64. Costerus, FranciscusToelsteen van de versierde apostoliche successic eens weder doopers Jacob Pieterssen van der Molen (T'Hantwerpen, By Ioachim Trognesius, 1603).Google Scholar

65. Successio Anabaptistica, dat is, Babel der Wederdopers, doer V. P. (Coloniae, 1603).Google Scholar Reprinted in BRN 7:15–87, together with an excellent introduction by editor S. Cramer, in 1910.

66. Vertoogh aen de Successoors des Jesuijts D. Francisci Costeri, die met zijne (maer niet de recht) Toetsteen heeft willem toetsen ende wederlegghen de Successio Apostolica, Anno 1600. Door Jacob van der Moelen. (Tot Alcmaer, 1604).Google Scholar

67. Successio Apostolica, p. 3.

68. Ibid., p. 6.

69. Ibid., p. 8.

70. Ibid., p. 12.

71. Ibid., pp. 66–67.

72. Vertoogh, in the introduction.

73. Ibid., pp. 7–8. For a very different kind of statement on the subject in our own day see Küng, Hans, “What is the Essence of Apostolic Succession?” in Concilium (New York: Paulist Press, 1968), 34: 28–35,Google Scholar as well as other articles on that subject in the same volume.

74. Costerus, pp. 94–95.

75. Vertoogh, p. 23.

76. BRN 7:76.

77. Ibid., p. 19.

78. Quoted in Pelikan, Jaroslav, “An Essay on the Development of Christian Doctrine,” Church History 35 (03 1966): 11.CrossRefGoogle Scholar