The biblicism of the Anabaptists

What does it mean for us today?

Jan Luyken: Etching, 1681

Some ten years ago now, preparing for my last pastorate, I read in its entirety The Complete Works of Menno Simons.

Menno Simons was a Roman Catholic priest of the 16th century. In the process of exercising his priestly role he had learned Latin, Greek and the teaching of the Church Fathers, but he had never actually read the Bible. It was two years after his ordination in 1524 that, with great trepidation, he finally opened the covers of this forbidden book.

For 12 years Menno was a village priest. But he did not take his office or his life very seriously. Then one day, while administering the mass, a doubt arose in his mind – that what he had been taught about the mass could not be true. He dismissed the thought as the temptation of the devil. But the doubt persisted. Finally he decided to seek relief by diligent study of God’s Word. It was a turning point in his life.

To make a long story short, this act of desperation became a pattern of life for Menno Simons. Though he initially remained in the Catholic Church, the habit of seeking insight from God’s Word eventually led him out of it and into a life of pastoral ministry in which the Bible became the source of all his convictions and living.

Reading Menno’s works, one has the overwhelming impression that whatever he thought, whatever he taught, and however he lived, the authority of Scripture was the determining factor. His writings are literally saturated with biblical allusions, quotations and paraphrase. If you want to see what Anabaptist biblicism is, all you have to do is read one of his writings.

But having said that, let me summarize more explicitly the characteristics of such biblicism.

1. It begins with an unqualified confidence in Holy Scripture. It asserts that what Scripture says, God says, and if God said it, that settles it (2 Timothy 3:16; Galatians 1:9). H. S. Bender, former patriarch of the Mennonite Church, wrote in the booklet Biblical Revelation and Inspiration, “If we abandon our confidence in the Bible, the Mennonite Church is lost; we will ultimately disappear in the stream of history. We have no other option; we can be a church under the authority of theologians, or a church under the authority of a hierarchy. Let us make our choice. As for me, mine is made. I want my church now, and to the end of its earthly ministry to be a church of the Bible.”

2. Anabaptist biblicism assumes that in order to understand God’s Word we need to experience the new birth. This makes us children of God, indwelt by the Spirit of God (Romans 8:9, 1 Corinthians 2:14). Without the indwelling Spirit, the Bible is a closed book, no matter how learned we may be.

3. Anabaptist biblicists affirm that the writings of the Bible are not the invention of imaginative men, but that credible witnesses recorded their testimony of events actually experienced and that when the prophetic word was received by those prophets, they were moved by the Holy Spirit to write down their messages (2 Peter 2:16–21).

4. The Anabaptists taught not only that the Bible would remain a closed book unless one experienced the enlightenment of the Holy Spirit, but also that insight is granted only to those who are willing to obey its commandments. Jesus said, “My teaching is not mine but his who sent me. Anyone who resolves to do the will of God will know whether the teaching is from God or whether I am speaking on my own” (John 7:16, 17). Or to put it another way, a willingness to obey is a prerequisite to understanding. This is why Anabaptists were fundamentally committed to a life of discipleship. It was not sufficient to state one’s theology correctly; one needed to have theology that impacted life.

5. Anabaptist biblicism implies a diligent study of the Word of God. In the 16th century, books were rare since the printing press was a recent invention. But the Bible was a book every Mennonite home would covet before any other. And it was avidly read. Because many of their views challenged even some of the other Reformation teaching, the early Anabaptists were often estranged and even persecuted by the societies in which they lived. From the court records of their trials, it is immediately evident that they possessed an amazing knowledge of the Bible.

   “Amazing is not too strong a word,” says J.C. Wenger, “for the fact is that untrained lay Christians often proved more than a match for the Roman Catholic doctors of theology who interrogated them. So overwhelming was this proficiency in the Scriptures that it was explained as being due to demon possession.” When one’s opponents make such an allegation, it is tantamount to saying their knowledge of Scripture is supernatural.

6. The Anabaptists taught that while God’s people are people of the Book, the community of God’s people is the proper context in which Scripture is to be understood. The believing community is the interpreting community. This is a guard against individualism. While there are specialists in our midst who make a vocation of interpreting the Bible, the task of such students is not to dominate the process of interpretation but to exercise leadership in it.

7. Anabaptists believe that God’s revelation to us through His Word is progressive. For example, the Old Testament gives us little teaching on the resurrection. In time this lack is removed, and when Jesus is raised from the dead, it comes to its clearest expression. So we believe that God’s fullest revelation is through the deeds and words of our Lord Himself and those whom He authorized and equipped to convey that teaching (Hebrews 1:1–3). An Anabaptist biblicism reads the Scriptures with Christ as a lens.

It should be said that what in our circles is a badge of honour, is in some circles a term of derision. Suffice it to say that there is a caricature of Anabaptist biblicism we ought to reject. We do have an appreciation for extra-biblical knowledge and general revelation; we do not view the Bible as a textbook in science, philosophy, economics, etc.; we do have a respect for creeds, confessions, and past theologians, though we may well disagree with some; and we deplore the manner of indiscriminate proof texting that refuses to acknowledge the importance of seeing texts in their historical, cultural, logical and literary contexts. What we do acknowledge is that understanding our faith requires us to insist in going back to the Bible.

And what are the practical implications, for each of us today? Simply this: we have a Bible we can trust, and we should read it daily, commit to a church in which it is faithfully taught, and obey what it says.

Sieg Wall is a retired MB pastor, living in Winnipeg. This article is excerpted from a sermon he preached at Jubilee Mennonite Church last June.