BAPTIST OR ANABAPTIST?

PETER DUANE BAUGH

cclesiastical movements are not static. As with the microcosm of individual spiritual experience,
denominational macrocosms are subject to a variety of different phases, including growth and
development, victory and defeat and stagnancy and reversal. New ideas are introduced and
accepted. Old views are modified, discarded and resurrected again. With each new period of religious
thought comes a process of transition, either correcting or misdirecting, inspiring or dispiriting, uniting
or dividing, but always transforming.
Baptist history is inevitably an examination of this process and of our relationship to it as Baptists. The
dynamic energy of Pentecost with its luminous purity and explosive growth gives way to the rise of
Roman Catholicism and the long midnight of ignorance and superstition. Revivals erupt across the scene
as charismatic firebrands driven by supernatural Holy Spirit power shatter the darkness with irrefutable
Gospel truth. Missionary activity surges forward only to fall into decline and fade into obscurity.
Reformation brings new liberties and fresh opportunities while simultaneously creating additional
tensions and drawing new lines of division, hostility and antagonism. With each newly-formed alliance
comes newfound comrades, while theological recalibrations drive impassible barriers between longtime
friends and once-intimate associates.
And yet, somehow, this dimension of transition has largely escaped the eye of the typical Baptist
historian. Instead of confronting the student with an ever-fluctuating organic process with its attendant
ebbs and flows, the Baptist historian in the Trail of Blood mold has often presented his subject matter
as one long, steady, monotonous narrative of almost constant uniformity. This is one the greatest
weaknesses of the Trail of Blood model of Baptist history, at least in its current form, and it is probably
also the reason why more scholarly historians tend to dismiss it altogether.
This is not a denial of Baptist perpetuity. It simply means that Baptist history is more textured, more
varied than it is generally depicted as in this model. The model itself does not need to be discarded as
some would claim. But it does need to be recalibrated to present us with a more detailed, more
comprehensive set of data.
Perhaps nowhere does this weakness manifest itself so glaringly as in the effort to trace Baptists
through the Mennonites and Swiss Anabaptists. It is possibly the greatest blunder that Trail of Blood
Baptist historians have made. Baptists may trace their spiritual lineage to the Waldensians, but it is
through the Lollards and Welsh Baptists and not through these Reformation Era Anabaptist groups that
we do so.

I.

THE CATEGORIES OF THE ANABAPTISTS

Before proceeding, it is necessary to define our terminology. For simplicitys sake, we will categorize
Baptists of every variety (Particular, Primitive, Reformed, Independent Fundamental, Southern,
Separate, Missionary, General, Regular, United, Free-will, Two-Seed-in-the-Spirit Predestinarian, Biblebeliever, American, etc.) under the name Baptist or Baptists. We will categorize those in the Swiss
Anabaptist and Mennonite tradition, including the Amish and Hutterites, under the name Anabaptist
or Anabaptists. We will use these two terms throughout the following pages to designate these
respective denominational families.

In order to understand the historical process in the rise of the Anabaptists, we will also refer to
subgroups within the Anabaptist family by the names which identified them at given periods of history.
These groups would include the Swiss Brethren founded and led by Conrad Grebel in 1525, the Austrian
Hutterites founded and led by Jacob Wiedemann in 1528 and the Obbenites founded and led by Obbe
Philips in 1534.i

II.

THE CONTEXT OF THE ANABAPTISTS

To be fair to the current Trail of Blood model, it is only right that we acknowledge the influence and
presence of the Waldensians throughout Europe during the Dark Ages, right up until the Protestant
Reformation as the context in which these Anabaptists first appeared. Thomas Armitage gives the
following account:
Recent investigators, and especially Keller, have clearly shown that the principles of
the Waldensians spread very early in Bohemia and influenced the Reformation under
Huss, giving rise at last to the Bohemian Brethren. Tradition says that Waldo himself
went thither, and that his followers abounded in Austria on the Bohemian border. It
is equally clear that as early as 1182, the views of Waldo had found their way into
Holland, and when persecution raged against the Waldensians in Southern Europe,
many of them found refuge in the Netherlands, so that by 1233 Flanders was full of
them. Many of these were weavers (Tisserands), and the first Baptists found in
Holland were of that trade. So numerous were they that Ten Kate says, All the
weaving was in the hands of Anabaptists. Van Braght records the martyrdom of
hundreds of these refugees, who were known by different nicknames, and were living
quietly in the Netherlands, long before Luther was born.ii
There is no reason to dispute this. The Waldensian missionary program is well-documented, and James
Wylie informs us that as a result of their labors, the seed of the divine Word was scattered throughout
Europe more widely than is commonly supposed.iii Beyond all dispute, the Anabaptists appeared in the
historical and geographical wake of the Waldensian evangelical efforts.

III.

THE CONGREGATIONALISM OF THE ANABAPTISTS

It is also worth noting that the Anabaptists, in their understanding of church polity, do share some very
striking similarities to Baptists. Their zealous contention for a congregational model that is almost
identical to that of the Baptists can be found in the writings of their foremost leaders, including Menno
Simons and Balthasar Hubmaeir. This view of Ecclesiology was so dear to them that they frequently paid
for it with their very lives, often after being subjected to the most brutal and horrific tortures available
in that immediate Post-Medieval context. The oft-repeated account of their relentless, unshakable
courage in the face of merciless cruelty and unfathomable inhumanity serves as a monument to the AllSufficient Grace of God to overcome the most seemingly insurmountable difficulties and challenges.
This noble spirit and admirable testimony make it all the more understandable that so many Baptist
historians have sought to include them in our Trail of Blood.

IV.

THE CONTRASTS OF THE ANABAPTISTS

But different men often arrive at similar conclusions in different ways, while still maintaining much that
is radically dissimilar and even irreconcilable. This is the case with the Anabaptists and the Baptists.
Unfortunately, the similarities between the two groups have been so remarkable, so genuinely
noteworthy, that Baptist historians have frequently overlooked their dissimilarities altogether or have at
least failed to attach due weight to their significance. And while this oversight may be charitably
pardoned as an honest mistake, it must be corrected nonetheless.

A. THE ANABAPTIST VIEW OF BAPTISM

The Anabaptists practiced baptism by effusion, not by immersion. This was true of all three branches of
Reformation Era Anabaptists. Whether we consider the Swiss Brethren, the Austrian Hutterites or the
Obbenites of that period, we find that none of them immersed their converts or even advocated the
doctrine that Biblical baptism is performed by immersion.iv
The baptism of George Jacob Blaurock, a former Roman Catholic monk, by Conrad Grebel, the founder
of the Swiss Anabaptists, furnishes us with an example of this. Describing his baptismal experience,
Baptist historian Thomas Armitage informs us that Grebel poured water on his head.v To these
Reformation Era Anabaptists, this was entirely sufficient and satisfactory.
Even more significant is the case of Menno Simons, perhaps the greatest leader that the Anabaptists
have ever had. Armitage seems reluctant to admit it, but acknowledges that Whether he was ever
immersed is a matter of dispute, and that the Mennonites practiced pouring.vi In this debate, Simons
own statements should resolve the issue entirely. In his most famous and beloved work, the Foundation
of Christian Doctrine,vii Simons makes the following statement:

It seems to me that these and the like commands are more painful and difficult for
perverse flesh, naturally so prone to follow its own way everywhere, than to be the
recipient of a handful of water.viii
No true Baptist has ever described a genuine baptismal candidate as the recipient of a handful of
water. Yet this is exactly the language and baptismal mode of the Reformation Era Anabaptists.
Compare this with the clear and unambiguous language of William Tyndale in which he describes
baptism by terms such as The plunging into the water, the pulling out again, and dipping:

The plunging into the water signifieth that we die, and are buried with Christ, as
concerning the old life of sin, which is Adam. And the pulling out again signifieth that
we rise again with Christ in a new life, full of the Holy Ghost, which shall teach us and
guide us, and work the will of God in us, as thou seest, Rom. vi.ix

Again:
So in baptism; the thing is the promise to be of the church of Christ: the sign is the dipping into the
water, with the holy words.x

B. THE ANABAPTIST VIEW OF SOTERIOLOGY

The Anabaptists were full-blown Arminians of the worst variety, in which a member of the New
Covenant could still fall from Grace and be eternally damned. So radical was the Anabaptist strain of
Arminianism, that Simons and his followers actually taught that a saved parent could be damned as a
result of his childs sins. Simons warns his followers that this is a possibility that they must fearxi:
Therefore, all who fear the Lord, love your children with divine love; seek their
salvation with all your hearts even as Abraham, Tobit, and the Maccabean mother
did. If they transgress, reprove them sharply. If they err, exhort them paternally. If
they are childish, bear them patiently. If they are of teachable age, instruct them in a
Christian fashion. Dedicate them to the Lord from youth; watch over their souls as
long as they are under your care, lest you lose also your own salvation on their
account.xii
In other words, the Anabaptists denied that a parents faith could save their child, but they taught that a
childs sin could damn their parents! Perhaps no other point highlights just how far removed the
Reformation and Puritan Era Anabaptists were from the Baptists than this one.

C. THE ANABAPTIST VIEW OF THE INCARNATION

Another serious error held by the Reformation and Puritan Era Anabaptists revolved around the Virgin
Birth and the two natures of the Lord Jesus Christ. Simons, in his zeal to exalt the Deity of Christ, and in
his great caution against wrongly dividing Christ into separate persons, advocated a model of the
Incarnation that in some respects resembled the ancient Docetist error. With the exception of the Swiss
Brethren, who rejected Simons model, sixteenth century Anabaptists held that Jesus became a man in
the virgin Mary, but not of the virgin Mary.xiii As a result, in the worst case, Jesus authentic humanity
was called into question and, by extension, his validity as a substitutionary sacrifice for fallen sons of
Adam. At its very best, even when most charitably considered, this view still robbed the Lord Jesus
Christ of his Davidic heritage. If Jesus only became a man in the Virgin Mary, but not of the Virgin Mary,
he could not rightly be called the Seed of David or the Son of David. Consequently, he could not
legitimately fulfill the Davidic Covenant.
Reytse Aysess, an Anabaptist martyr, describes this perspective in a letter written from prison in
Leeuwaerden:
I said that Christ came by His divine power out of heaven, was conceived in Mary
through the Holy Ghost, and born of her, and took upon him the form of a servant,
and became like unto us in all things, except sin, so that He was not born of the

blood, nor of the will of the flesh, and did not receive flesh or blood from Mary, which
came to pass in such a manner, that Mary at first could not understand it herself, for
she asked the angel: How shall this be, seeing I know not a man?xiv
No Baptists of this period is known to have ever entertained such a model of the Incarnation of the Lord
Jesus Christ.

D. THE ANABAPTIST VIEW OF PACIFISM

The Anabaptists today are outspoken advocates of total pacifism. This is no new development for them,
but harkens back to their origin in the immediate aftermath of Zwinglis Reformation. While one faction
of Anabaptists became so entangled in class warfare and frenzied prophetic expectations that
Millennialism turned to militancy,xv the greater body of them whiplashed to the other extreme through
the influence of the Schleitheim Confession of 1527xvi, abjuring all involvement in civil government as
sinfulxvii and embracing an absolute pacifist position.xviii
It should be noted that their most scholarly leader, Balthasar Hubmaier,xix made a serious but
unsuccessful attempt to steer the Anabaptists towards a more moderate position. His thoughtful and
worthwhile work entitled On the Sword, written shortly before his arrest in 1527 addressed the
Scriptural problems with total pacifism. Hubmaiers efforts failed to stem the tide of reactionary
Anabaptist thought, however, and after twelve more years of debate within the Anabaptist ranks, his
grounded, centrist, Biblical position on the subject was entirely abandoned.xx
In contrast, the Waldensians resorted to self-defense in 1488, when Pope Innocent VIII sent an army to
destroy them.xxi Many Baptists served in the Parliamentary Army under Oliver Cromwell.xxii And during
the American War for Independence, Baptists such as John Gano served under George Washington in
the struggle against British tyranny.xxiii In short, Baptists have never sympathized with the Anabaptist
extremism of total pacifism.

E. THE ANABAPTIST VIEW OF CHURCH DISCIPLINE

The Anabaptists also carried the doctrine of church discipline to an unbiblical extreme. While Baptists
today are unquestionably disobedient to Scripture when it comes to this subject, reform attempts must
avoid the radical tendencies advocated by Menno Simons. Simons, in a letter written in 1558,
essentially carried the doctrine so far that even the marriage covenant was severed by the practice of
shunning:
Concerning the separation of married persons the following is specifically my
conviction, position, idea, basis, and conception; yes, my life and death. Namely, we
must use and employ the doctrine of separation between man and wife carefully and
sanely, according to the decision of the elders and brethren named earlier and in part
once more drawn up by our dear brethren Dir[k] Ph[ilips], Le[naert] Bou[wens], and
by ourselves in the presence of many elders. For the Word of the Lord must,
according to our plain understanding of it, take in its reach all people without respect
of persons, and must not be turned aside in the case of husband and wife.xxiv

Notice especially the phrase in the presence of many elders. In other words, Simons position is not
unique to himself. It was shared and supported by a host of Anabaptist church leaders. Once more, we
find the Anabaptists resorting to an extreme that Baptists have never taken.

V.

THE CATALYST OF THE ANABAPTISTS

By now it should be apparent that the Anabaptists represent a radically different family of Christians
than the Baptists. Although some doctrinal similarities might suggest a kinship, these begin to appear
superficial when seen within the broader context of their general theological outlook. They are not
sufficient grounds for claiming the Anabaptists as the spiritual predecessors of the Baptists.
But what about the fact that they seemed to flourish in precisely the same regions where the
Waldensians had labored? Doesnt that suggest some sort of a connection? How else do we explain
this? Can we simply dismiss it as mere coincidence?
The best answer seems to be that amidst the turmoil of the Protestant Reformation, underground
Waldensian families and possibly even entire congregations, emerged from hiding and united with the
Anabaptists, based upon their mutual understanding of ecclesiology. This would explain the rapid
growth of Anabaptism during the Reformation and Puritan Eras, as well as the reason why that growth
did not continue afterwards with its initial rapidity. This, however, would reflect a shift away from the
historic Baptist position represented by the Trail of Blood, and not a continuance of it. In this model,
Anabaptism would appear as a catalyst for change rather than as an agent of preservation. The result of
this catalyst was departure from the historic Baptist faith in exchange for a more radical set of ideas, not
a furtherance of Baptist perpetuity.
This sort of catalyst is not without precedent in church history. The Montanists, for example, in the face
of persecution, in all probability merged with the Pauliciansxxv with whom it is clearly evident that they
had previously been in communion,xxvi abandoning their charismatic tendencies along the way in
exchange for the more grounded Baptist views of the Thonrak. The Poor of Lyons, it is believed, were
assimilated into the ranks of the Waldensians, exchanging their Roman Catholicism for Vaudois
evangelicalism.xxvii In keeping with this pattern, a Waldensian merger with the more extreme
Anabaptists would only be a repetition of an ecclesiastical transition that had occurred repeatedly
throughout the Dark Ages. It would not, however, be an agent of Baptist perpetuity, but a catalyst for
change.

CONCLUSION
The Baptists and the Anabaptists represent two distinctly different families within church history.
Although certain similarities appear upon the surface, especially in terms of Ecclesiology, the serious
differences between them outweigh the parallels. It is a mistake to include the Anabaptists in the Trail
of Blood as numerous Baptist historians have done. The Anabaptists may, theoretically, have
assimilated certain Waldensians or even groups of Waldensians into their ranks, but they did not
originally emerge from among the Waldensians, much less did the Baptists emerge from the

Anabaptists. It is safest and most in keeping with the facts to trace Baptist history through the Lollards
and Welsh Baptists rather than through the Anabaptists.
i

J. C. Wenger, ed., The Complete Writings of Menno Simons (Scottsdale, PA: Herald Press, 1984), 139.
Thomas Armitage, History of the Baptists (Springfield, MO: Baptist Bible College, 1977), 407.
iii
James Aitken Wylie, The History of the Waldenses (Birmingham, AL: Solid Ground Christian Books, 2012), 20.
iv
J. C. Wenger, ed., The Complete Writings of Menno Simons (Scottsdale, PA: Herald Press, 1984), 139.
v
Thomas Armitage, History of the Baptists (Springfield, MO: Baptist Bible College, 1977), 336.
vi
Ibid, 411.
vii
J. C. Wenger, ed., The Complete Writings of Menno Simons (Scottsdale, PA: Herald Press, 1984), 105.
viii
Ibid, 139.
ix
William Tyndale, The Works of William Tyndale, vol. 1 (Edinburgh: The Banner of Truth Trust, 2010), 253.
x
Ibid, 595.
xi
J. C. Wenger, ed., The Complete Writings of Menno Simons (Scottsdale, PA: Herald Press, 1984), 390.
xii
Ibid.
xiii
J. C. Wenger, ed., The Complete Writings of Menno Simons (Scottsdale, PA: Herald Press, 1984), 420.
xiv
Theileman J. van Braght, ed., The Martyr's Mirror, 2d English ed. (Scottsdale, PA: Herald Press, 2009), 996.
xv
J. C. Wenger, ed., The Complete Writings of Menno Simons (Scottsdale, PA: Herald Press, 1984), 9 - 11.
xvi
H. Wayne Pipkin and John H. Yoder, ed., Classics of the Radical Reformation: Balthasar Hubmaier (Scottsdale, PA:
Herald Press, 1989), 493.
xvii
Theileman J. van Braght, ed., The Martyr's Mirror, 2d English ed. (Scottsdale, PA: Herald Press, 2009),1010.
xviii
Anabaptist Peace Center http://www.apcwdc.mennonite.net/What_is_Anabaptism (accessed 19 April 2015).
xix
H. Wayne Pipkin and John H. Yoder, ed., Classics of the Radical Reformation: Balthasar Hubmaier (Scottsdale, PA:
Herald Press, 1989), 13.
xx
Ibid, 493 - 523.
xxi
James Aitken Wylie, The History of the Waldenses (Birmingham, AL: Solid Ground Christian Books, 2012), 32.
xxii
Manda Cooper, ed., This Day in Baptist History, Parliament, the Baptists, and Their Principles, by E. Wayne
Thompson (Greenville, SC: Bob Jones University Press, 1993), 541.
xxiii
Manda Cooper, ed., This Day in Baptist History, A City Pastor, a Revolutionary Chaplain, a Wilderness
Preacher, by E. Wayne Thompson (Greenville, SC: Bob Jones University Press, 1993), 327.
xxiv
J. C. Wenger, ed., The Complete Writings of Menno Simons (Scottsdale, PA: Herald Press, 1984), 1058.
xxv
Fred C. Conybeare, The Key of Truth: A Manual of the Paulician Church of Armenia (London: Clarendon Press,
1898), 185.
xxvi
John T. Christian, A History of the Baptists, vol. 1 (Texarkana, TX: Bogard Press, 1997), 44.
xxvii
William Stephan Gilly, Valdenses, Valdo, and Vigilantius: Being the Articles under These Titles in the Seventh
Edition of the Encyclopaedia Britannica (Edinburgh: Adam and Charles Black, 1841), 53.
ii