The year 1525 marked the beginning of one of the most powerful revivals in the history of the Christian church. Beginning with three men who baptized each other contrary to the teachings of the state church, this revival swept through Europe like a wildfire. Stressing a renewed focus on Christ as Lord of our lives, on unconditional love for all mankind, and on literal obedience to the Word of God, these Swiss Brethren (also labeled as Anabaptists) preached the gospel of Jesus everywhere they went.
“By the blood of the Lamb, and by the word of their testimony,” these men relentlessly spread the Word of truth throughout a hungry society, and repentant sinners joined their ranks by the thousands. However, they also incurred the wrath of the governing authorities of the day, and horrible persecution broke out. Thousands upon thousands of these believers were slaughtered in the most gruesome ways imaginable. In response, the survivors began to flee from city to city and from country to country, always carrying with them this radical message of the kingdom of God.
This revival soon spread to the country of Holland, where another group of Anabaptists began to form called the Mennonites. They also preached the gospel faithfully and experienced the same rapid growth as multitudes one by one humbly bowed the knee and surrendered themselves to the lordship of Jesus Christ. But they also faced intense persecution. At one point, all criminals (including murderers) in the country were offered freedom, a pardon from the Emperor, and one hundred guilders if they could deliver the Anabaptist preacher Menno Simons into the hands of the torturers and executioners.
Eventually, however, the persecution ended, and these Dutch Mennonites began to gain acceptance as upstanding members of society. Their outstanding growth continued for a time, so that by the late 1600s there were approximately 160,000 of them living in Holland. This wonderful time of peace, together with a strong work ethic and a frugal lifestyle, led these Anabaptists into a time of great prosperity. Many of them were soon ranking among the wealthiest members of society and wielding great influence in the social and political realms. By all appearances, God was pouring out blessings on His church as never before. The years of hardship were over, and success, it seemed, had finally arrived.
But in the midst of this peace and prosperity something strange began to happen. Instead of the amazing growth these Anabaptists had experienced in their early years, their numbers started to decline drastically. Instead of pulling people in from the world around them and making them disciples of Jesus, it seemed that they had all they could do just to keep their own children in the faith. This trend continued until, within a period of about 100 years, their numbers had shrunk from 160,000 to fewer than 28,000.
What was it that went wrong? What caused the sudden powerlessness in this group of Christians called the Mennonites? In what way were the Dutch Mennonites of the 1600s different from the Swiss Brethren of the 1500s?
If you had asked a young Mennonite minister in the year 1680 to describe the differences between the beliefs of his church and the beliefs of the Swiss Brethren 150 years earlier, I can imagine that his answer would have gone something like this: “Well, doctrinally we believe everything pretty much the same as they did. Practically, however, we certainly do some things differently than they.”
But would that have been true? Were the main differences only in practice? Or were there major doctrinal differences as well?
The answer to this question finally comes down to our definition of the word “doctrine.” We humans have a tendency to simply change our vocabulary as our culture changes. When the practical outworking of a particular teaching becomes unpopular, we simply stop labeling it as a “doctrine.” Thus, we can continue to glibly say that “our doctrine has not changed.”
In truth, there were doctrinal differences between these two groups. The early Swiss Brethren had both taught and practiced the doctrine of nonaccumulation. The 17th-century Dutch Mennonites seemingly didn’t teach or practice it. One writer, describing the change in their attitude toward the world, makes these statements:
Originally the ideal was “in the world but not of the world”; later it was “free in and of the world.” . . . For such freedom of activity, as was desired, material prosperity was necessary. [Horsch, p. 255]
On July 25, 1659, Thieleman J. van Braght wrote an introduction to his book, Martyrs Mirror. In this introduction he warned his people, the Dutch Mennonites, that the danger they were facing from prosperity and worldliness was far greater than the danger their fathers had faced from martyrdom.
Was van Braght correct? Was it true that a wrong view of earthly possessions was a leading cause of the spiritual decline? Or were the two totally unrelated to each other? Would faithful teaching of the doctrine of nonaccumulation have provided at least a small barrier against the tragedy that these people faced?
As Christians living in a country such as the United States of America, what lesson would God want us to learn from this account?
Be the first to react on this!
