Summary

In this essay, Conrad Stoltzfus (current senior student at Sattler College) argues that while both the reformers and the Anabaptists embraced the humanist call of ad fontes (“back to the sources”), the Anabaptists redefined it as a return to the original spiritual life of Scripture rather than merely to its original texts. He shows how this led them to emphasize transformation through the Holy Spirit and the vernacular Bible, turning scholarship into lived faith and the written word into a living encounter with Christ.

In a chapter on Italian Humanism in his book on the Reformation, Carlos Eire opens with a story that illustrates humanist values. He tells of the discovery of a tomb in Rome in 1485 that contained the body of a girl that was so well preserved in plaster that she appeared completely life-like, as if she had been laid to rest that very day.¹ For the city of Rome, it was the incarnation of the humanist principle of ad fontes (back to the sources). It perfectly encapsulated the increasing interest in the primal simplicity and force of the ancient past, like a beautiful, pale girl lying in a tomb, waiting to be discovered. Many historians have argued that this strain of humanism was the main ideological source of the Reformation. In fact, the mantra ad fontes is the foundation for Luther’s own famous Latin catchphrase, sola scriptura, which emphasized a return to the original texts of the Bible. For the reformers, ad fontes was a principle to replace the authority of the Catholic Church. Instead of wading through the swamp of complex traditions in the medieval Church, the reformers looked to the pure, simple spring of the Bible in its original languages. Ad fontes was also a fundamental source of Anabaptism; but, it was expressed quite differently. Whereas the mainstream reformers emphasized a return to original texts of the Bible, the Anabaptists emphasized a return to the original spiritual life of the Bible, which resulted in an emphasis of the vernacular over the Biblical languages.

The Anabaptists drank from the same well of humanism as the mainstream reformers, which is especially demonstrated in the Swiss reformer Conrad Grebel. Grebel received a deep and rigorous humanist education, studying under such well known humanists as Glarean and Vadian.² He was also thoroughly trained in the classical languages, spending years in Latin school³ and often referencing classical Greek literature in his early letters. For example, in a letter to Myconius from Paris in 1520, he writes, “If you have been reading Greek as you usually do, I think you would like Homer, since you delight in the poets. An edition beautifully bound is on sale for less than two scutati.”⁴ Here he demonstrates both a deep knowledge of his friend, but also of Homer and classic literature. Furthermore, in a letter to Castelberger in 1525, Grebel reveals an impressive personal library of classical and humanist literature, offering to send Castelberger “the grammars of Theodorus and Urbanus, the Metamorphoses, and perhaps the annotations of Erasmus on the New Testament.” Grebel’s library demonstrates his interest in classical Greek literature, and his apparent skill in the language. Furthermore, the fact that the famous humanist Erasmus of Rotterdam was one of the authors in his library clearly displays his connection to Christian humanism.

Grebel was drawn into the cause of the reformers and instructed in Greek by Ulrich Zwingli himself, who encouraged him in his study of the Biblical languages. In 1520, depressed and having just returned to Zurich after a few years in Paris, Grebel found solace in a group of scholars convened by Zwingli who would meet to study Greek literature.⁵ His skill in Greek increased so much in his time with Zwingli that he even dared to instruct his old humanist professor Vadian in Greek literature.⁶ Zwingli, who regarded all those who could not read the Bible in its original languages as “unlearned Pfaffen,”⁷ instilled in Grebel a deep value of studying the original texts of the Bible. In fact, when Grebel was completely converted to the reform movement in 1522, Zwingli wanted to appoint him and Felix Mantz, another promising young scholar, to positions as Greek and Hebrew teachers in a theological school that he planned to found in Zurich.⁸ However, before these plans came to fruition a disagreement, primarily on the issue of the Lord’s Supper and baptism, arose between these two young men and the mainstream reform movement in Zurich that ended in Grebel’s execution.

The fundamental distinction between the ad fontes of mainstream reformers and that of the Anabaptists was that the Anabaptists emphasized a return to the original spiritual life of the Bible, rather than simply the original texts. They argued for a reform of the heart as well as the mind. This is evident in Grebel’s letter to Muenster on September 5, 1524, which was one of the first writings to express his discontent with the Zurich reform. He says,

Just as our forefathers had fallen away from the true God and knowledge of Jesus Christ and true faith in him, from the one true common divine Word and from the godly practices of the Christian love and way, and lived without God’s law and gospel in human, useless, unchristian practices and ceremonies and supposed they would find salvation in them but fell far short of it, as the evangelical preachers have shown and are still in part showing, so even today everyone wants to be saved by hypocritical faith, without fruits of faith, without the baptism of trial and testing, without hope and love, without true Christian practices, and wants to remain in all the old ways of personal vices and common antichristian ceremonial rites of baptism and the Lord’s Supper, dishonoring the divine Word.⁹

Ironically, Grebel compares the issues in the mainstream reform with the very issues that drove them to reform in the first place. He argues that, just like the medieval Catholic church, mainstream reformers were claiming the Christian spiritual life, while living a lifestyle that proved the opposite. And, he demonstrates the very principle that Zwingli taught him, sola scriptura, by appealing to the one true common divine Word. However, he argues that, because of personal vices and antichristian ceremonial rites of baptism and the Lord’s Supper, the mainstream reform demonstrated hypocritical faith, dishonoring the divine Word. In short, Grebel argues that a return to the original texts is not enough if one does not adopt and experience the life he finds there. In fact, he claims that a simply intellectual return to the original texts that does not result in a changed life is hypocritical faith.

The Anabaptists’ unique application of ad fontes is bound up in the motivations and implications of their conviction in believers’ baptism. In Mantz’s petition of defense in 1524, he argues for the validity of believers’ baptism on a scriptural basis, even saying,

I should have thought that all this would have been clear to you simply from the truth itself, for your shepherds have often asserted that the Scriptures, to which we are not to add or subtract anything, must be allowed to speak for themselves. Although this has been the intention, it was never carried out and we have never been given the opportunity to speak, nor has the Scripture been heard.¹⁰

In other words, he argues that mainstream reformers have not been true to their principle of sola scriptura, which is obviated by the fact that they reject believers’ baptism. Of course, the assumption of this accusation is that the Bible clearly teaches believers’ baptism, which Mantz goes on to substantiate with quotations of Scripture. In essence, Mantz claims that the principle of sola scriptura is fulfilled, not simply when we allow the scripture to speak for itself, but only when we actually take the words to heart and let them change us.

Furthermore, believers’ baptism is based upon a belief in the filling of the Holy Spirit and the regeneration of the soul, which is the ultimate example of experiencing the original spiritual life of the Scriptures. For example, Mantz says,

After receiving of this teaching and the descent of the Holy Spirit, which was evidenced to those who had heard the word of Peter by speaking in tongues, they [the apostles] were thereafter poured over with water, meaning that just as they were cleansed within by the coming of the Holy Spirit, so they also were poured over with water externally to signify for the inner cleansing and dying to sin.¹¹

In this excerpt, Mantz ties believers’ baptism to the coming of the Holy Spirit as well as inner cleansing and dying to sin. This connection between baptism and the filling and regeneration of the Spirit demonstrates clearly the Anabaptist conception of ad fontes. They believed that a return to the original textual sources would lead one to adopt doctrines such as believers’ baptism, which would in turn fill one with the original source of spiritual life: the regenerating Holy Spirit. And this emphasis on the regenerating power of the Holy Spirit had surprising effects on the Anabaptist relationship with the Biblical languages.

The Anabaptist emphasis on experiencing the original spiritual life of the Scriptures led them to devalue the biblical languages and focus rather on the vernacular. In fact, Zwingli accuses the Anabaptists of throwing aside the Biblical languages all together, quoting them as saying, “one does not need a knowledge of languages. We understand the Scriptures as well as those who know many languages. It is a matter of the Spirit and not of skill.”¹² And, while this is almost certainly an exaggeration, Zwingli’s characterization seems to align with the implications of Anabaptist theology. Their conviction that believers’ baptism resulted in regenerated individuals who are filled with the Holy Spirit implies that there will be those who do not know the Biblical languages yet, when baptized, are filled with the very Spirit that inspired the Scriptures. Furthermore, if faith is a personal choice by each individual, even the simple and uneducated, this necessitates that the faith needed to make one’s decision would not require knowledge of the Biblical languages. These two points are likely the theological foundation to the Anabaptists’ lay-congregational hermeneutic, involving the entire church of Spirit-filled members to make decisions on Scriptural interpretation.¹³ As Packull puts it, “the ultimate interpretive authority rested not with a literate elite but with the believing, discerning community gathered to hear and obey God’s Word.”¹⁴ And since very few in the Anabaptist communities actually knew the biblical languages, this inevitably led to the common text of the congregation being in the German vernacular.¹⁵

Anabaptism was primarily a movement of laypeople who, even though they were mostly uneducated and illiterate in the Biblical languages, believed that they had access to the original spiritual life of the Bible. Perhaps one of the best examples of this is the declaration of faith by the Anabaptist needle merchant Hans, recorded in the South German & Austrian Anabaptist Sources. Hans was uneducated and illiterate,¹⁶ yet able to give quite a rigorous defense of his faith, quoting many Scriptures in German from memory. Especially interesting is his account of his evangelistic message to those who were interested in baptism,

My brother or sister, a Christian must suffer much. Are you prepared, for the sake of truth, to suffer persecution, contempt, scorn, the forsaking of house, yard, wife and child, all for the sake of the Lord? If God gives you the grace so that the Word of God is opened to you, you must abstain from all the joys of the world that the flesh desires.¹⁷

Instead of a privilege of the educated, Hans believed that understanding the Word of God came through the gift of grace. In this sense, he believed that a return to the original spiritual life of the Scriptures did not come through a knowledge of the original languages, but rather through God himself as the ultimate source. Furthermore, he clearly communicated that an understanding of the Word of God resulted in a moral transformation and a commitment to following Christ through hardship. Hans testifies further, “One buys two sparrows for a farthing, and not one falls to the ground without the will of the Father. If you believe as you talk, nothing will happen to any of you, for the mouth of truth himself has said it.” Here he demonstrates his belief that the verses he is quoting in the vernacular German come straight from the sources, for the mouth of truth himself has said it. Therefore, at least for Hans the needle maker, the vernacular scriptures were the source that connected him to the original spiritual life of the Bible. However, it would be saying too much to claim that the Anabaptist emphasis on returning to the original spiritual life of the Scriptures is opposed to the value of the biblical languages. In fact, Menno Simons himself, when criticized for devaluing the biblical languages, said, “Never in my life have I despised learning and skill in languages, but from my youth, honored and loved them…through which the precious word of divine grace came to our knowledge.”¹⁸ Simons highlights the importance of the Biblical language because it was through them that the precious word of divine grace came to our knowledge. And, just as this is true of Christianity at large, it is also true of Anabaptism specifically. It was because of those who were skilled in the biblical languages that there were even translations in the German vernacular for the Anabaptists to read. Furthermore, Grebel and Mantz put their own brilliant minds to use in formulating Anabaptist theology and compiling concordances of vernacular scripture for the uneducated that supported main Anabaptist doctrines.¹⁹ In other words, even though the Anabaptist application of ad fontes as a return to the original spiritual life of the Scripture eventually led to the devaluation of the biblical languages, it is fundamentally dependent on the biblical languages. And Grebel and Mantz didn’t see a contradiction between the value of both the original texts and of the original spiritual life. In fact, it was their journey into the original texts of the Bible that opened their eyes to its original spiritual life.

In conclusion, I argue that the Anabaptists apply the humanist principle of ad fontes in their emphasis on returning to the original spiritual life of the Bible. And, although Anabaptist theology was largely formulated by men who were very skilled in the biblical languages, their emphasis on believers’ baptism that results in the Holy Spirit’s dwelling in each individual led to an emphasis on the vernacular Scriptures. To return to picture of humanism with which I opened this paper, in the Anabaptist conception of ad fontes, going back to the sources is not simply finding the pale, beautiful girl in the tomb; rather, it is the discovery of a pale, beautiful girl who comes out of the tomb and walks about. And she doesn’t speak Latin, Greek, or Hebrew; rather, she speaks German. However, in the end, it is not a girl at all. It is Christ who rises, comes out of the tomb, and bids us follow him.

1. Carlos Eire, Reformations: The Early Modern World, 1450–1650, vol. 53 (University of Toronto Press, 2018). ↩︎
2. Robert S Kreider, Anabaptism and Humanism: An Inquiry into the Relationship of Humanism to the Evangelical Anabaptists (R. Kreider, 1950), 126. ↩︎
3. Ibid. ↩︎
4. Leland Harder, ed., The Sources of Swiss Anabaptism (New York: Plough Publishing House, 2019), 101-102. ↩︎
5. Kreider, Anabaptism and Humanism: An Inquiry into the Relationship of Humanism to the Evangelical Anabaptists, 127. ↩︎
6. Harder, The Sources of Swiss Anabaptism, 120. ↩︎
7. Werner O Packull, Hutterite Beginnings: Communitarian Experiments during the Reformation (JHU Press, 1999), 18. ↩︎
8. Kreider, Anabaptism and Humanism: An Inquiry into the Relationship of Humanism to the Evangelical Anabaptists, 128. ↩︎
9. Harder, The Sources of Swiss Anabaptism, 285-286. ↩︎
10. Harder, 312. ↩︎
11. Harder, 313. ↩︎
12. Harder, 402. ↩︎
13. Packull, Hutterite Beginnings: Communitarian Experiments during the Reformation, 16. ↩︎
14. Ibid. ↩︎
15. Packull, 29. ↩︎
16. Arnold C. Snyder, ed., Sources of South German/Austrian Anabaptism, Classics of the Radical Reformation (New York: Plough Publishing House, 2019), 136. ↩︎
17. Snyder, 140. ↩︎
18. Menno Simons, The Complete Works of Menno Simons, vol. 1 (JF Funk and Brother, 1871), 145. ↩︎
19. Packull, Hutterite Beginnings: Communitarian Experiments during the Reformation, 30-31. ↩︎

Bibliography:

Eire, Carlos. Reformations: The Early Modern World, 1450–1650. Vol. 53. University of Toronto Press, 2018. 

Harder, Leland, ed. The Sources of Swiss Anabaptism. New York: Plough Publishing House, 2019. 

Kreider, Robert S. Anabaptism and Humanism: An Inquiry into the Relationship of Humanism to the Evangelical Anabaptists. R. Kreider, 1950. 

Packull, Werner O. Hutterite Beginnings: Communitarian Experiments during the Reformation. JHU Press, 1999. 

Simons, Menno. The Complete Works of Menno Simons. Vol. 1. JF Funk and Brother, 1871. Snyder, Arnold C., ed.

Sources of South German/Austrian Anabaptism. Classics of the Radical Reformation. New York: Plough Publishing House, 2019.

Featured image courtesy of the National Historical Museum of Sweden (NHM) on Unsplash.