3.6.1 Anabaptist ecclesiology
Some scholars see ecclesiology as Anabaptism’s primary point of distinction from Catholicism and Protestantism (Murray 2022; Snyder 1995). Early Anabaptist ecclesiology highlighted the visibility of the faith community as the body of Christ. As Snyder put it, ‘the anchor of Anabaptist theology and spirituality was [the] community, formed first by the spiritual, and then the water baptism of believers, maintained by fraternal admonition, and nurtured by the Supper of the Lord, by communal worship and visible expressions of love among the members of the body’ (1995: 155). These ecclesiological convictions led Anabaptists to support the separation of the church from the state and to reject the notion of an encompassing Christian civic community (corpus Christianum) in which everyone is a member from birth – at least after attempts to reform local church and government institutions had failed (Stayer 1976). Since Anabaptists viewed uncoerced, freely chosen repentance and faith as necessary conditions for baptism and church membership, they separated from churches that baptized infants and held what they regarded as low standards for discipleship. Anabaptist congregations throughout the centuries have broadly embodied or at least pursued this ecclesiology.
3.6.2 Marks of Anabaptist ecclesiology
It is possible to identify at least four marks of an Anabaptist ecclesiology: baptism, the ban, the Lord’s Supper, and mutual aid or the community of goods (Snyder 1995: 83–100). Anabaptists have developed the medieval Catholic theology of a trifold baptism. The Christian life begins with Spirit baptism – an inward, invisible reality resulting from a positive response to the Holy Spirit’s call to repentance and faith in Christ. Water baptism follows from Spirit baptism as the initial outward or visible step of obedient discipleship through which believers confirm and declare their commitment and are initiated into Christ’s body, the church. Thirdly, the suffering witness of the community devoted to the way of the cross has been described in terms of a ‘baptism of blood’. The sharp distinction in much Anabaptist theology between church and world finds its theological and practical rationale in the belief that, through baptism, believers transition from one sociological-spiritual reality (the world) to another, purportedly very different one (the church).
The ban – or a version of church discipline that includes total exclusion from Christian community – therefore becomes a central feature of Anabaptist congregations, for without rigorous discipline, the community risks compromising its defining discipleship commitment. Ideally the ban is intended not as punishment, but as an invitation for the unrepentant to experience the consequences of their sin and, in doing so, to be led finally to repentance and reintegration into community. Anabaptist theologians have frequently emphasized the egalitarian character of church discipline – describing it as ‘mutual accountability’ or ‘fraternal admonition’ – however, in practice, it has often been the instrument of a strong, largely male leadership. The ecclesiological emphasis on discipline has occasioned much division throughout the history of Anabaptism.
Anabaptists share the Lord’s Supper as an expression and renewal of their baptismal pledge. Following the example of Zwingli and the Dutch Sacramentarians, Anabaptists have rejected the models of Catholic transubstantiation and Lutheran consubstantiation, which deal with the presence of Christ in the sacrament in different ways. Anabaptists have focused on the remembrance of Christ’s saving sacrifice in obedience to his instructions (Mark 14:22–25). Because Anabaptists stressed the communal dimension of salvation, they saw the memorial Supper as reaffirming personal commitments to follow Christ as well as to serve and care for one another. These commitments have sometimes taken the shape of ritualized feet washing ceremonies. Although an early Anabaptist congregational order recommends frequent partaking of the Supper (see Packull 1995: 303–315), as church discipline came to the fore, its observance became less frequent and prefaced with periods of teaching and repentance.
The testimony of mutual love offered in the Supper took concrete form in economic, social, and political allegiance to the body of Christ, especially as seen in economic sharing. Although the latter was initially understood in terms of a community of goods, only the Hutterites maintained this practice, while other groups instead stressed voluntary mutual aid (Stayer 1991; Packull 1995). Some scholars suggest that commitment to mission could also be regarded as an ecclesial mark for Anabaptists, though persecution quickly limited missionary opportunities (Shenk 1984). Later Anabaptist groups that live in isolated rural communities disengaged from missionary activities have sometimes been known as the ‘Quiet in the Land’. From the middle of the nineteenth century, Mennonites in first the Netherlands and then the southern regions of the Russian Empire became very active in the Protestant mission movement. North American Anabaptists followed this lead from the late 1800s. This activity gave rise to new Anabaptist communities in Africa, Asia, and Latin America – many of which now lead their own missionary endeavours.
Other ecclesiological distinctives include a general tendency towards simplicity and informality, in part due to the early need to meet secretly in homes or forests, or to establish unobtrusive meeting spaces (as in the seventeenth-century Netherlands). While most Anabaptist groups have embraced at least a functional clerical hierarchy, there has also been an emphasis on communal participation. For example, many Anabaptist congregations have included time for discussion and debate in response to teaching and preaching. In particular contexts other issues have been regarded as ecclesiologically definitive – for example, intercultural diversity, nonresistance, the use of oaths, baptismal mode, worship styles, and the roles of women and sexual minorities.
When discussing baptism, discipline, the Lord’s Supper, mutual aid, feet washing, and other practices, Anabaptists have often opted for the language of ‘ordinances’ rather than ‘sacraments’. They are ‘ordinances’ in the sense that they have been ordained by Jesus Christ and so are mandatory for disciples. This language testifies to the priority of obedient discipleship in Anabaptist theology – an emphasis which, combined with stringent discipline, has frequently resulted in legalism. In facing this challenge, some Anabaptist theologians have recently underscored the Spirit’s role as gracious initiator and director of the entire Christian life (Pitts 2018).
3.6.3 Church, world, and ecumenism
One of the most interesting elements of Anabaptist ecclesiology is its different views of the church-world relation. Although it is likely that some of the first Anabaptists expected their desired reforms to reshape church and society completely, persecution encouraged the development of a radical ‘two kingdoms’ theology. In this view, the world is perceived as not governed by God but rather under Satan’s dominion, and governments, as part of this satanic order, inevitably employ coercive violence (Snyder 1995: 386). Yet there has always been a plurality of Anabaptist perspectives on this topic. Menno Simons, for example, promulgated a softer dualism in which he both spoke to his congregation as true, nonresistant Christians, and implored secular rulers to live up to their Christian confession by limiting rather than abolishing their use of arms for defensive peacekeeping. This ‘Dutch’ legacy, which maintains the church-world distinction but envisions a positive role for Christian government, can be seen in the Mennonite colonies in first the Russian Empire and then in Canada and South America. The more strictly dualistic ‘Swiss-German’ legacy has shaped Mennonites and Amish in the United States, though even here there is some variation. African, Asian, and Latin American Anabaptists exhibit similar complexity. Colombian Mennonites, for example, have leveraged their commitment to the church’s embodiment of nonviolence into an important role in their country’s peace process. While some Tanzanian Mennonites serve in the military, the church’s witness has led to its involvement in national Muslim-Christian peacebuilding efforts.
Because Anabaptists have traditionally understood other Christian communities as belonging to ‘the world’ (the history of persecution should not be forgotten here) they have historically prioritized ecumenical and interreligious relations less than other Christian denominations. A grassroots ecumenism has nevertheless broken out in certain contexts, such as the relationship between persecuted Swiss Anabaptists and the ‘truehearted’ Reformed Christians who protected them. In colonial Pennsylvania, Anabaptists often had friendly connections with Quakers and Pietists. More recently, Javanese Mennonites have collaborated with neighbouring Muslims, while at annual Bridgefolk gatherings in the United States, Catholics and Mennonites join together for study and worship. More generally, Anabaptist communities have always been shaped by complex interactions with other Christians, and their responses to those interactions have contributed to both division and renewal.
Recently, Anabaptists have become involved in formal ecumenical and interreligious efforts. During the first half of the twentieth century, Anabaptists and Quakers organized several Historic Peace Church Conferences to coordinate their lobbying efforts for recognition of conscientious objectors and to promote peace witness among their own members. Since 1967, Anabaptists have also participated in a series of Believers’ Church Conferences with Baptists, Pentecostals, and churches descended from the Restoration Movement. In the twenty-first century, Mennonite World Conference has engaged in official dialogues with Catholics and Lutherans on baptism. German Mennonite theologian Fernando Enns has been a significant participant in the World Council of Churches and was central to that organization’s ‘Decade to Overcome Violence’ project (2001–2010). Enns’s writings on ecumenism urge Anabaptists to grapple with the unity of the church and the trinitarian basis of that unity (Enns 2007). Canadian Mennonites have also engaged in dialogue with Shi’a Muslims from Iran. Recent grappling with Mennonite complicity in the Holocaust has led to a dialogue with Jews, and similar efforts to face Mennonite participation in colonialism spurred the formation of a coalition of Indigenous and other Mennonites to oppose the ongoing legacy of the Doctrine of Discovery (the legal framework that justified European colonization from the late fifteenth century).
These activities suggest that Anabaptists teach and embody no single view of ‘church and world’, even if the tradition is marked by a strong sense of the church’s witness as distinct from the world.