The Seven Theses of the Anabaptists
The ninety-five theses Martin Luther posted on the door
of Wittenberg Church on October 31, 1517, are very famous.
They began a revolution in world affairs religiously, politically,
and even socially. Four years later he was called to account
before the greatest spiritual and secular powers on earth:
representatives of the Pope and Charles V, Emperor of the
Holy Roman Empire. Luther's answer still rings out as a
monument to the freedom of conscience and the dignity of
the individual. Indeed, his stand that day has been called
one of the greatest moments in history:
Unless I am convicted by scripture and plain reason - I
do not accept the authority of the popes and councils,
for they have contradicted each other - my conscience is
captive to the Word of God. I cannot and I will not recant
anything for to go against conscience is neither right
nor safe. Here I stand. I cannot do otherwise. God help
me, Amen!
Just ten years after Luther's ninety-five theses shook
the world, another young priest posted seven theses on
the door of the same cathedral in Worms in which Luther
was called to account by the Imperial Diet. [1] The
seven articles of Jacob Kautz were posted in exactly the
same style and for exactly the same purpose as Luther's
ninety-five theses -- to stimulate discussion and debate.
However, Kautz and his movement, the Anabaptists, met the
fate the Pope desired for Luther's Reformation also --
fire and the sword.
The Threat of the Anabaptists
They achieved the dubious and dangerous distinction of
being labeled heretics by both Catholics and Protestants.
And why?
This was because their radical theology was a threat to
the existing social order in which church and state were
collaborators. This radical criticism of the very structure
of society resulted in the unrelenting attempts of Catholics
and Protestants to stamp it out. [2]
To understand why they were viewed that way takes us to
the heart of Christian theology and its age-old insistence
on encompassing all of society in an authoritarian embrace -- no
exceptions allowed. And in many ways, even today in nations
where church and state are separate, this fundamental world
view remains in Christian theology, and its expression
may well see the darkness of night once again.
Infant Baptism and Free Will
Jacob Kautz and two others, Hans Denck and Ludwig Haetzer,
defended the seven articles in the town square of Worms
on June 13, 1527. The third thesis they had posted on the
door of the cathedral struck at what many saw as a pillar
of society -- infant baptism. One was tied from birth to
his church and to his state. But these men objected:
The baptism of infants is not of God. It is against God
and his teaching given to us through Christ Jesus, his
beloved Son. [3]
This rejection of historic Christian doctrine was founded
upon two things. First, the baptism of infants was found
nowhere in the New Testament, and secondly, infants could
make no free choice in the matter. Anabaptists could not
stand Luther's insistence that man's will was enslaved,
either to God or to the devil, and man could not freely
choose 
whom he would serve. [4] This
was a point of contention between not only the Reformers
and the Anabaptists, but between the Reformers and the
Catholics.
The Protest against the Protestants
The essence of what the Anabaptists said, which got them
in so much trouble, was that the life of believers
had to be different or else the Reformation was
just a farce. People had to live their convictions out.
Their challenge to the Reformers in these Seven Articles
was simple: "How can you say all these things and not live
them?"
The sixth thesis of Worms said that if they weren't living
them out, then all that Christ had done for them was of
no value. In other words, the Anabaptists taught that whoever
did not follow Christ and obey His commands did not believe
in Him. For them, Christ may as well not have come:
Jesus from Nazareth did not suffer for us in any way,
he did nothing to satisfy God for us, as long as we do
not follow him in the way he went before us -- unless we
follow the commands of the Father, like Christ follows
them -- every man according to his ability. [5]
This was revolutionary talk! Two weeks later, the councilors
of Worms expelled the "troublemakers" from their midst.
They dared to expose the Reformation's nakedness, like
the child in Hans Christian Anderson's famous parable, The
Emperor's New Clothes. Just as the foolish emperor's "new
clothes" were imaginary, so was the Reformation's connection
to Christ. It was, in their view, only adorned with the
intellectual doctrines of clever men like Luther.
Naturally, the Reformers responded on the basis of theology,
not on whether their religious instruction made any difference
in the lives of the people. Indeed, it was an essential
aspect of their theology that the Reformation need make
no radical difference in the lives of the people. Their
works were irrelevant to God. Only their "faith" mattered.
To expect the Reformation to make the people more holy
or godly would be advocating "works righteousness." This
charge was hurled at the Anabaptists.
Church, State, School, and Army
There were areas where Luther did want his reformation
to make a difference in society. One of them was compulsory
education. He compared it to the state's supposed right
of appropriating a man's life and compelling him to bear
arms and kill other men in war. If the state could do one,
it could do the other.
But I hold that it is the duty of the temporal authority
to compel its subjects to keep their children in school,
especially the promising ones we mentioned above... If the
government can compel such of its subjects as are fit for
military service to carry pike and musket, man the ramparts,
and do other kinds of work in time of war, how much more
can it and should it compel its subjects to keep their
children in school. [6]
The state could compel citizens in this manner because
to Luther the citizen was the property of the state. So
you can see how Reformation theology would be very useful
to princes! In fact, the Reformation, especially that part
of it under Luther's leadership, ended up exalting the
authority of the state even more than it was under Catholicism.
He upheld in his teaching what scholars call "princely
absolutism."
Because they taught that believers should imitate Christ
and obey His commands (including the commands to lay down
the sword, to not take oaths or serve in government), the
Anabaptists were charged with preaching "works righteousness." Disobeying
Christ's commands was not "works," but to put any urgency
on obeying them was. For this heresy, the state churches,
Catholic or Protestant, ruthlessly persecuted the Anabaptists.
Atonement
Underlying this charge against the Anabaptists was the
theological issue of the atonement of Christ for sin. What
was its nature? Or to put it another way, since the Reformers
and Anabaptists believed similarly in many ways about the
atonement, what was man's part? What was his response to
the atoning sacrifice of Christ? Luther gives the typical
Reformation response - man has no part in or response to
atonement at all:
There was no counsel, help, or comfort until this only
and eternal Son of God in His unfathomable goodness had
compassion upon our misery and wretchedness, and came from
heaven to help us. Those tyrants and jailers, then, are
all expelled now, and in their place has come Jesus Christ,
Lord of life, righteousness, every blessing, and salvation,
and has delivered us poor lost men from the jaws of hell,
has won us, made us free, and brought us again into the
favor and grace of the Father, and has taken us as His
own property under His shelter and protection, that He
may govern us by His righteousness, wisdom, power, life,
and blessedness. [7]
This view of man's redemption as something doctrinal,
relating to man's legal status before God, as essentially
something done to him, profoundly shaped Reformation theology.
But such a view of the atonement was inadequate or insufficient
for the Anabaptists, since,
It concentrated chiefly on Christ's death and had been
reduced to a passive or forensic doctrine which concerned
only a change in humanity's legal status before God. It
was an external benefit bestowed by God regardless of human
involvement. No wonder that Luther and Calvin who followed
this line of thinking resorted to the Augustinian doctrine
of predestination. [8]
The benefit of Christ's atonement was bestowed on those
who, like the citizens in Luther's Reformation, had no
more choice in the matter than they did in schooling their
children or waging war. So Luther quite rightly regarded
his book, The Enslaved Will, as his greatest
work, for it encapsulated his whole view of humanity's
relationship with God and the devil. For the Anabaptists,
such views of God and man were contrary to Scripture and
abhorrent to conscience.
Atonement was far more than a legal transaction in the
heavenly court. It meant "at-one-ment" with God and referred
to all the ways in which God and humans have been reconciled
through the work of Jesus Christ... In what way does the
atonement bring God and humanity back together again? To
them Christ was not only redeemer, he was also example.
The gospel was not only the good news of salvation but
also a series of directives for the Christian on how to
live, how to follow Christ the example. And in following
Christ, humanity could be brought back into the life of
God. [9]
Death of a Movement
Yet in the end the Anabaptists proved that they also lacked
the power to overcome sin in their lives. Their keen understanding
of Christ's work towards them and in them, which set them
apart from their fellow Christians (who murdered them),
did not, in the end, keep them from relentlessly dividing.
Whatever kept their groups together through the intense
persecution they endured from without was not sufficient
to deliver them from the disputes within. The evangelistic
fire was quenched and they took their ranks among the legions
of Christian laity silenced under their preachers and their
doctrines.
But the memory of the often noble lives and courage of
the Anabaptists serve as stepping stones for those who
would someday go beyond them to restore all things that
have been lost. For all things must be restored, beginning
with the good news. The Scriptures promise it will happen. [10]
[1] Official government
and religious council.
[2] F.F. Hiebert, "The
Atonement in Anabaptist Theology," Direction Journal, Vol.
30, #2, p. 122-138.
[3] Peter Hoover, Secret
of the Strength, Benchmark Press, Shippensburg,
PA (chapter 7).
[4] They were appalled
by Luther's ascription to God of evildoing, which Luther
both did and denied doing in the same breath: "Here then
you see, that, when God works in, and by, evil men, the
evils themselves are inwrought, but yet, God cannot do
evil, although He thus works the evils by evil men; because,
being good Himself He cannot do evil; but He uses evil
instruments, which cannot escape the sway and motion of
His Omnipotence." (Luther, The Bondage of the Will, Discussion:
Second Part, Section 84. Luther was a master of the use
of contradiction in his logic (and his life).
[5] Hoover, Secret
of the Strength , chapter 7.
[6] Martin Luther, "Sermon,
that children should be Kept to School." Luther's Works,
Vol. 46 [Philadelphia: Fortress Press, 1967], pp. 213-57.
[7] Martin Luther, Large
Catechism, Part Second, Of the Creed, Article II.
[8] Hiebert, "The Atonement
in Anabaptist Theology"
[9]Ibid
[10] Mark 9:11-12
Back
