The First 499 Years

Just got home from our church’s celebration of it (reformation day). Great thing to thank the Lord for.

Locally, the Minneapolis Institute of Arts has a major exhibition on Martin Luther & the Reformation, now through 01/15/2017:

http://new.artsmia.org/luther/

http://www.startribune.com/life-of-martin-luther-on-display-in-rare-mia-exhibit/399168641/#1

Our celebration of the Protestant Reformation is justified. But it should be tempered by the fact that Protestants like Martin Luther and John Calvin were no friends of Baptists and Baptist beliefs.

Those who believed like Baptists were among those persecuted by the Protestant Reformers of the 1500s.

David R. Brumbelow

I’m reading an older book I found in a used bookstore; “The Origins of Sectarian Protestantism” by Littrel. The free church (and NT model) is something to fight for.

Josh, there was at times almost open war between the early Anabaptists and the Evangelische (Lutheran) and Reformed parties. Some allege that the pacifism of their spiritual descendants derives not only from the Sermon on the Mount (do not resist an evil man and all that), but also from the drubbing they got, as they got the worst of it.

If you get a chance, you’d be blessed by grabbing a copy of William Estep’s The Anabaptist Story or Franklin Littrel’s The Origins of Sectarian Protestantism via inter-library loan and reading them. They’re short and easy books. They’re eye-opening. You’d like them.

Who was persecuted by the Protestant Reformers?

Anyone who believed in Religious Liberty.

Anyone who dissented from the State Church.

Anyone who believed in Believer’s Baptism.

Anyone who believed in a Regenerate Church Membership.

Anyone who believed the elements of the Lord’s Supper are symbolic.

Anabaptists.

Whether orthodox or not, anyone who disagreed with Luther and Calvin.

David R. Brumbelow

I could be wrong, but it sounds like you don’t like the Reformers!!

Thanks Tyler. I have the first one but have not read it yet.

Anabaptists in one sense were like Baptists of today. Some were heretical, many were not.

Good books on Anabaptists:

William Estep, The Anabaptist Story. (I agree with Tyler)

Leonard Verduin, The Reformers and Their Stepchildren.

Malcolm Yarnell, The Anabaptists and Contemporary Baptists.

Do I like the Reformers?

Well… yes, and no. But I sure like Religious Liberty

David R. Brumbelow

I need to re-read McBeth’s account of the non-conformists in England in the 17th century. I also need to find a good introduction to the state church’s persecution against Baptists (and others) in New England in the 18th century. So little time …

Also, Dr. Fred Moritz at Maranatha Baptist Seminary teaches a wonderful Baptist History class!

This may be a little simplistic, but I tend to see the Reformers in a similar light to those conservatives in the SBC that brought that denomination back from modernism. Obviously, the historical significance of the Reformers is greater, but the story is similar in some ways.

Even though I’m not in any way a Landmarker or Baptist-Brider, since Christ said that the gates of Hell would not prevail against his church, we have to assume that there were some number of true believers that had existed since the NT, at least some of which would have been outside the state churches. (And no, I don’t think this meant there was a baptist denomination with an unbroken line of churches that had always been 100% right doctrinally.) The reformation of those inside the apostate state churches is definitely not to be thought of as unimportant, even though Christ’s true church had not ceased to exist. The reformers certainly had their doctrinal issues, as did the Anabaptists, but we can see the reformation as a time when God had mercy on many of those in the state churches, and allowed them to see the light of truth, which was not always applied perfectly, and come out and become true believers. Today’s believers can, in my opinion, legitimately trace their spiritual heritage to the influence of all the historical believers, even if they weren’t all baptists.

Some people have the ability to transcend their backgrounds, training and tradition. They can shove these aside and strive towards truth. Other men have aharder time, and only go half-way. Peter had problems shedding his racist, perverted Judaism. Paul didn’t, even though he was a highly trained Pharisee. Why? Temperament, makeup, nature, personality, and a million other things.

Many of the Reformers had problems shedding everything. Luther couldn’t ditch traces of sacrementalism. Zwingli could. But, neither he or Calvin could ditch the State Church model they inherited from Rome. I think Zwingli knew it was wrong, but was pragmatic on this point. He was being political. Many Anabaptist groups, however, had no problem ditching the whole rotten carcass.

I think we need to remember that we are all men and women shaped by our culture and by our times. Yes, Calvin and Zwingli were wrong on some points. We can read about them and pinpoint why and where they were wrong. But, knowing where they were coming from, we should be willing to understand why they did what they did - even if we know it was sinful. Finally, we can look at our own lives, our own contexts, and seek to not make the same mistakes ourselves.