KOREA PRESBYTERIAN JOURNAL OF THEOLOGY Vol. 49 No. 3

Baptismal Controversy Between Anabaptists and City Reformers in the 16th Century , and Its Significance in the Development of the Reformed Tradition in Theology: Focused on Zwingli’s and Hubmaier’s Writings

LEE Seung-Gap, Ph.D. Professor, Historical theology Hanil University and Theological Seminary, South Korea

I. Preface Ii. Baptismal Controversies between Radicals and City Reformers Iii. Significance of Baptismal Controversies in the Development of the Reformed Tradition in Theology Iv. Conclusion

Korea Presbyterian Journal of Theology Vol. 49 No. 3 (2017. 9), 165-197 DOI: 10.15757/kpjt.2017.49.3.007 166 KOREA PRESBYTERIAN JOURNAL OF THEOLOGY Vol. 49 No. 3

Abstract

The purpose of this paper is to reexamine the baptismal controversies between the first Anabaptists and the major city reformers such as Ulrich Zwingli in the early phase of the 16th century Reformation and to explicate the significance that those conflicts implied in the development of the tradition of Reformed Theology. The Reformation opened an era of the most remarkable liturgical revolution in the history of . As a radical movement, including all the aspects of spiritual, moral, and social renewal, the group contributed to the development of social, economic, and political thoughts, challenging the age of modern Europe, and, especially, as a religious movement, to the development of certain characteristic thoughts of Protestantism, in the sense that they challenged other mainline/magisterial reformers to concentrate their energies on articulating their own views and interpretations in the process of defending their developing positions against the radical voices. In fact, even though they have been called “leftists” of “radicals,” it was true that the Anabaptists tried to establish a radically “true church” upon the apostolic pattern shown in the New Testament as they realized the essence and the actual form of the Church. Accordingly, the controversial struggles that the early Reformed reformers had with the Anabaptists on are to provide crucial resources and insights so that we can discern the essence of the theological issues erupted in the process of the Reformation liturgical reforms and the application of the leading principles such as sola Scriptura, sola Gratia, and corpus Christianum, affirming the sovereignty of God in salvation and the corporate character of the Christian community in the development of the Reformed Tradition in theology. The content of this paper can be summarized, first, to trace the historical development of the early debates on between the Anabaptists and the Zurich Reformers, to clarify the theological issues of the baptismal debates through using the conflicting writings of Hubmaier and Zwingli, and finally to reflect upon the controversies’ significance in the development of the theological identity of the Reformed Tradition.

Keywords

Anabaptism, Liturgical Revolution, Balthasar Hubmaier, Ulrich Zwingli, Reformed Tradition Baptismal Controversy between Anabaptists and City Reformers in the 16th Century Reformation DOI: 10.15757/kpjt.2017.49.3.007 167

I. PREFACE

The Reformation opened an era of the most significant liturgical revolution in the history of Christianity. In origin, the questions that the earliest reformers raised against the Roman were focused on ecclesiastical issues, and some of the controversial disputes were especially liturgical in nature. Despite the so-called City Reformers’ attempts to reconcile the differences in the views on the liturgical issues of the age, such as the Lord’s Supper or infant baptism, the Reformation as a movement which had been inspired to recover “true church/rechte Kirche”, could not stop the breaking out of the tragic story of Christianity as “a history of denominational cleavages and prosecutions.” Because the differences in the ecclesiological views played as physical reasons for the denominational divisions of the Protestant body, various efforts to arrive at convergences on liturgical issues have been continued in the table of contemporary ecumenical discussions. It is, thus, understandable that controversies on baptism, one of the most crucial and disputable issues in the liturgical reform of the sixteenth century has been also a major subject in the ecumenical dialogues in the latter half of the last century. In summary, the purpose of this paper is to reexamine the baptismal controversies between first Anabaptists and major city reformers in the 16th century and to explicate their significance in the development of the so-called ‘Reformed Tradition’1 in theology. This study, as the present writer expects, will be used as an attempt to challenge those people with the background of the Reformed tradition to understand the Anabaptists and to learn from each other in the dialogues of healing. The content of this paper can be summarized, first, to trace the historical development of the early debate on infant baptism between the Anabaptists and the Zurich Reformers,2 to clarify the theological issues of the early

1 The term “Reformed” here is used to distinguish the Calvinistic from the Lutheran and Anabaptist traditions. The Reformed tradition finds its roots in the theology of Ulrich Zwingli, the first reformer in Zurich, and John Calvin of Geneva, who in his biblical commentaries, but especially in the Institutes of the Christian Religion, developed a Protestant theology. 2 As Hughes Oliphant Old remarks, considering the reformation movement of the 168 KOREA PRESBYTERIAN JOURNAL OF THEOLOGY Vol. 49 No. 3 baptismal debates through using the conflicting writings of Hubmaier and Zwingli, and finally to reflect upon the baptismal controversy’s significant contribution in the development of the theological identity of the Reformed tradition. Anabaptism as a noteworthy part and one of the major movements of radical dissent in the history of Christianity was a spiritual, moral, and social renewal movement in the western Europe of the sixteenth- century. The term “Anabaptists,”3 which means “rebaptizers,” was applied to those radicals who entirely denied the validity of infant baptism and, as a result, were regarded as a heretic group of the “left wing”4 of the Reformation. Regretfully, the great achievements of the reforming giants, such as the likes of Ulrich Zwingli, , and John Calvin, overshadowed the works and significance of the marginalized in the Reformation process. Because history tends not only to be judged but also written by winners, the fact that the Anabaptists proved to be losers in that momentous turbulence has meant that their teachings and thoughts should have been disregarded, if not derided.5 It is, thus, not surprising that the increasing number of scholars in the latest century have focused their quests on the beginnings and theological traits of the radical groups in the Reformation, like the Anabaptists. In particular, the early Anabaptists’ teachings on baptism have been unjustly neglected and attacked by other influential city reformers. Even though, or because, the Anabaptists’ teachings

baptismal rite at the beginning of the 16th century, we need to look at the early reformers’ different approaches to reforming the baptismal rite. Cf. Hughes O. Old, “Origins of the Reformed Baptismal Rites in the Sixteenth Century,” Reformed Liturgy and Music 19 (Fall 1985), 197. 3 The word, “Anabaptist” is a Latin derivative of the Greek original, anabaptismos(re- baptism). The German word, Wiedertäufer means “one who re-baptizes.” 4 After Roland H. Bainton had coined the term “left wing of the Reformation,” George H. Williams introduced the terminology “Radical Reformation,” referring to reformers who sought to return, without governmental support and assistance, to the “roots”(radix) of Christianity. Cf. Roland H. Bainton, “The Left Wing of the Reformation,” The Journal of Religion 21/2 (Apr. 1941), 124-34. George H. William, The Radical Reformation (Philadelphia: Westminster, 1962). 5 Daniel Liechty, trans. & ed., Early Anabaptist Spirituality: Selected Writings (NY: Paulist, 1994), XV. Baptismal Controversy between Anabaptists and City Reformers in the 16th Century Reformation 169 on baptism challenged both religious and political leaders of the age,6 the reformed leaders like Zwingli and Bullinger as Zwingli’s successor as leader of the Zurich Reformation, and the Lutheran leaders like Luther and Melanchton who participated in the process of debates and establishment of their confession’s responses to Anabaptism, were, finally, very hostile to the radical groups, refuted the Anabaptists positions, and did not significantly attempt to deal fairly with them in their writings. Nevertheless, to say the least, it can be said that the Anabaptists contributed in an ecumenical debate of the age in the vein that they challenged other reformers to concentrate their energies on creating their own views and interpretations in the process of defending their side against the radical voices. Also, even though they have been called “radicals,” the Anabaptists have tried to establish a radically “true church” upon the apostolic pattern shown in the New Testament as they realized the essence and the actual form of the Church, as stated in Scripture.7 Accordingly, the controversial struggles that the early Reformed reformers had with the Anabaptists on infant baptism provide such crucial resources so that we can discern the essence of the theological issues raised in the process of the Reformation liturgical reform and the main points of the developments of the Reformed tradition in theology.8 To achieve the goal of this article, the writer, at first, will briefly investigate the situation of the early reformation progression and the rise of Anabaptists in Zurich. Then, through explicating the process of public disputations on the issue, this essay will make clear the

6 A number of Anabaptists formally abandoned their memberships in society because of their belief and practice on baptism, and adult baptism, not infant baptism, collapsed parental authority and societal unity. As a result, secular governments as well as ecclesiastical authorities, sought to control or annihilate the radical movement of dissenters. 7 Processing its different vision of the true church, the group of Anabaptists developed a revolutionary ecclesiology, including a pattern of separation from the state. 8 It’s here good to recollect Roland H. Bainton’s proper remarks, “In recent years, the historians of Lutheranism and have become increasingly aware that an understanding of their own movements is impossible apart from a grasp of the currents to which they were opposed.” Roland H. Bainton, “The Left Wing of the Reformation,” The Journal of Religion 21/2 (Apr. 1941), 134. 170 KOREA PRESBYTERIAN JOURNAL OF THEOLOGY Vol. 49 No. 3 different views which the early City Reformers and the Anabaptists had on baptism. Finally, through attempting to reflect upon several judgements upon the writings of Zwingli and Hubmaier, the writer will explore the theological issues related to baptismal rites, such as way of understanding Scripture, free will and salvation, and the relation between church and state, which has influenced the development of the essentials of the Reformed tradition in theology.

II. BAPTISMAL CONTROVERSIES BETWEEN RADICALS AND CITY REFORMERS

1. Historical Picture

Chronologically, the first appearance of the Anabaptists was in Zurich.9 In fact, the Anabaptists’ immediate root was the reform movement, which, under the leadership of Ulrich Zwingli(1484-1531), the founder of the reformed Protestantism in , had begun in Zurich, in 1519, six years earlier than the birth of Anabaptism. The group of so-called proto-Anabaptists who had been associated with Zwingli as grass-roots followers, expecting radical changes in line with the Scripture, became disillusioned with the course of the Reformation in Zurich and expressed a strong impatience with the lethargy and caution of those reformers who were leading the Reformation there by compromising with the secular authorities.10 Especially, with the Second Zurich Disputation(October 26-28, 1523), Conrad Grebel, Felix Manz, Balthasar Hubmaier, and Louis Haetzer, etc. who, up to that time, had supported Zwingli, began to prepare the separatist action.11

9 Daniel Liechty, Early Anabaptist Spirituality, 2. According to Liechty, a more careful reading of the sources leads us to date the beginnings of Anabaptism as 1525 for the Swiss brethren, 1526 for the South German Anabaptists, and 1530 for the Dutch movements. 10 Hughes O. Old, The Shaping of the Reformed Baptismal Rite in the Sixteenth Century (Grand Rapids: W. B. Eerdmans, 1992), 87. 11 The Anabaptists movement in Switzerland began in lay reading groups. As a Baptismal Controversy between Anabaptists and City Reformers in the 16th Century Reformation 171

The chief leader of the Anabaptists group for this boisterous period was Conrad Grebel(c. 1495-1526), a descendant of one of the most honorable families in Zurich, who had formerly enjoyed the friendship of his brother-in-law Vadian, and through him, also the one of Zwingli. And, to Grebel was united Felix Manz, the son of a prebend and a Zurich maiden; Wilhelm Reublin, George Blaurock, and Balthasar Hubmaier, the reformer and Anabaptist of Waldshut, who took a prominent part in the Second Zurich Disputation, seated on the side of the radicals. Also, the waves of the peasant insurrection, which raged at this time in Germany, threw Thomas Müntzer12 on the Swiss frontier. It was in Waldshut, the place of Hubmaier, where Müntzer approached Switzerland and held intercourse with the Zurichers of the like opinions, that the new community who began to devalue infant baptism, and to represent it as highly objectionable, was promptly given a badge of distinction, that is, re-baptism.13 In the public (third) disputation with the Anabaptists which took place on January 17, 1525, finally, Zwingli clearly made the position that the initiation of children into Christianity by baptism were comparable to the initiation of infants into Judaism by circumcision.14 The Zurich Council also declared that Zwingli and his supporters were the victors at the close of the disputation. As they denied the validity of infant baptism, and were considered as a threat to the unity and peace of Zurich by Zwingli and the Council, Grebel, Manz, and several others were ordered to confirm and forbidden to meet as a group. Thereafter, a mandate was issued to the effect that all who had not yet had their children baptized must do so within eight days on pain of expulsion from Zurich. It was January 21, 1525 that the resolution of the council

wave of house meetings for Bible study spread through the Allied District in 1522 and 1523, many of lay readers throughout the Swiss cities went on to become potent figures in the emerging Anabaptist movement. 12 Thomas Müntzer had studied at Wittenberg, and, afterwards, was a preacher at Zwickau, where he, with like-minded friends, the so-called “Zwickau prophets,” founded the sect of the Anabaptists. 13 R. Christoffel, Zwingli; The Rise of the Reformation in Switzerland, trans. John Cochran (Edinburgh: T.&T. Clark, 1858), 250. 14 F. H. Littell, The Anabaptist View of the Church (Boston: Starr King, 1958), 14. 172 KOREA PRESBYTERIAN JOURNAL OF THEOLOGY Vol. 49 No. 3 was confirmed. The Council issued a decree ordering Grebel and Manz to ‘desist from their arguing and questioning’ of infant baptism. Others leading members of the radical group who were not citizens of Zurich, namely Reublin, Johannes Brőtli, Ludwig Hätzer, and Andreas Castelberger, were ‘banished from Milords’ territory.15 The first of believers which were activated as a protest against the City Reformers’ liturgical reform, that is, “the formal begin- ning of Anabaptism” were performed in Zurich. On January 21, 1525, a half dozen men gathered at a house in Zurich’s Neustadtgasse near the Great Minster.16 Conrad Grebel, the chief founder of Swiss-South German Anabaptism, baptized George Blaurock(1492-1529), a priest who came to Zurich from Chur and later became one of the founders of the first Swiss Brethren congregation in Zurich. After his baptism at the hands of Grebel, Blaurock proceeded to baptize all the others present.17 Thus, “believer’s baptism” became the outward trademark of the Anabaptist movement. This event meant that antipaedobaptism was transformed into Anabaptism.18 Opposition against the baptism of children (a negative attitude, anti-paedobaptist) shifted to promulga- tion of baptism of believers (a positive program, proto-anabaptist).19 When those newly baptized were soon dismissed from Zurich, with ardent enthusiasm they marched to the battlefield and dispersed their new doctrine to nearly all European countries, and Anabaptism spread with great power especially in the German and Dutch speaking areas

15 Requoted in Paul Brand, “‘They had said nothing about rebaptism’: The Surprising Birth of Swiss Anabaptism,” German History 22/2 (2004), 158-59. 16 Stimulated by Ulrich Zwingli in Zurich, where group meetings for Bible study were well-known, scholars and other interested persons had frequently met in similar sessions since 1520, which Zwingli himself had participated. But, although some members of these study groups were there at that night in January, Zwingli was not. Walter Klassen, Anabaptism: Neither Catholic nor Protestant (Waterloo: Conrad, 1973), 3. 17 Referring to this event in his book, The Anabaptist Story, William R. Step says, “Anabaptism was born. ... This was clearly the revolutionary act of the Reformation. No other event so completely symbolized the break with Rome.” William R. Estep, The Anabaptist Story (Grand Rapids: W. B. Eerdmans, 1996). 18 Hughes O. Old, The Shaping of the Reformed Baptismal Rite in the Sixteenth Century, 93. 19 F. H. Littell, The Anabaptist View of the Church, 14. Baptismal Controversy between Anabaptists and City Reformers in the 16th Century Reformation 173 of central Europe. On March 16, 1525, the Town Council finally ordered all who would from that time on be rebaptized be exiled.20 Thus, the Anabaptist party completely divorced from the party of the City Reformers. On June 5, 1525, Vadian (Joachim Watt), who was a leader of the evangelicals, read his comprehensive book against the Tauffbrüder, and the persecution began. In May, 1525, the first Anabaptist died for his faith in the canton of . A year later, Grebel died of the plague away from home, and in January, 1527, Manz was publicly executed in Zurich by drowning for the crime of rebaptism. But, although many of these “apostles” were put to death, the Anabaptist movement did spread rapidly.

2. Infant Baptism vs Believer’s Baptism

The first Anabaptists challenged the Lutheran and Zwinglian theologies on a number of issues, and, the most physically controversial incident was the one they were involved most directly in the practice of adult baptism or believer’s baptism. That is to say, central to the Anabaptist concept of church was the inescapable tension between the so-called mainstream theology of infant baptism and the newly uprising of separatist claims on believer’s baptism. The Anabaptists, from the beginning, had a negative bias against infant baptism and condemned it.21 In general, the Anabaptists favored adult baptism as a confession of faith. For example, the Schleitheim Confession of the

20 The Council published the following ordinance. “An error having arisen in respect of baptism, to the effect that infants should not be baptized until they arrive at years of discretion, and knowledge of the faith; and some having, in consequence thereof, left their children unbaptized, we have ordered a disputation upon this matter on the grounds of Holy Scripture, and have ordained that without regard this error, children must be baptized as soon as born; and those who left their children unbaptized, must have this rite performed within the next eight days. Whoever will not confirm to this decree, shall, with wife and child, with purse and property, quit the town of our lords, their jurisdiction and territory, or take what father may befall him.” R. Christoffel, Zwingli, 253. 21 Yet, even among the Anabaptists, there were very diverse attitudes to the issue of baptism, which ranged from seeing it as an important act of public confession to arguing for the complete denial of the necessity of any physical baptism. 174 KOREA PRESBYTERIAN JOURNAL OF THEOLOGY Vol. 49 No. 3

Swiss Brethren(1527) states: “Baptism shall be given to all those who have learned repentance and amendment of life, who truly believe that their sins are taken away by Christ, and to all those who walk in the resurrection of Jesus Christ.” Balthasar Hubmaier also insists that baptism is essential to the life of the church, though denying that it is necessary for salvation. Hubmaier writes as below:22

Therefore the baptism in water is not what cleans the soul, but the “yes,” [of] a good conscience toward God, given inwardly by faith. Therefore the baptism in water is called a baptism in Remissionem Peccatorum (Acts second chapter), that is, for the pardons of sins. Not that through it or by it sins are forgiven, but by virtue of the inward “yes” of the heart, which a man outwardly testifies to on submitting to water baptism, saying that he believes and is sure in his heart that his sins are forgiven through Jesus Christ. Where baptism in water does not exist, there is no Church, no brother, no sister, no fraternal discipline, exclusion or restoration.

Furthermore, Hubmaier intensified the significance of water baptism through emphasizing the sequence of elements in worship,23 in his writing, A Form of Water Baptism: “preceding the Supper of Christ, there is no baptism, which is counter to clear Scripture, which indicates this sequence: first preaching, second faith, third confession, fourth water baptism, fifth breaking of bread (Acts 2:42).”24 One step further, to the Anabaptists, baptism signified a changed life by virtue of the death of Christ, though such change is by no means individualistic. According to their repeating assertions, no one is “to be baptized without Christ’s rule of binding and loosing.”(Matt 18:15-22). In other words, a baptized person commits himself or herself to the discipline of the

22 William R. Estep, The Anabaptist Story, 89. 23 Hubmaier rejected the word ‘Anabaptist,’ since, as he urged, child baptism was no baptism, John the Baptist had never baptized children, and, especially, “the biblical sequence, that is, preaching, repentance, faith and then baptism, must be followed.” G. R. Potter, Zwingli (Cambridge: Cambridge University, 1976), 192. 24 Pipkin H. Wayne & John H. Yoder, Balthasar Hubmaier: Theologian of Anabaptism (Waterloo: Herald, 1989), 390. Baptismal Controversy between Anabaptists and City Reformers in the 16th Century Reformation 175 community and thereby declares himself or herself ready to participate in dealing with sin in the community in a new and redemptive way. The person not only commits himself or herself to live the new life in obedience to the words of Christ, but also agrees to receive and to give certain active, deliberate help in doing so.25 Hubmaier, in this sense, emphasized that baptism was not only essential to the life of the church but also to Christian discipleship. Baptism was the sealing of a covenant with God and a witness to others, that is, the sign of committed discipleship, as it symbolizes one’s commitment to Christ and submission to his fellow believers in the church.26 Even though baptism was an important sign to the Christian life, as described above, the Anabaptists, from the beginning, raised severe opposition to infant baptism. In a letter to Thomas Müntzer in September of 1524, Conrad Grebel showed the antipaedobaptism of the Zurich circle quite explicitly.

So too, in the same way, every man wants to be saved in showy faith, without the fruits of faith, without the baptism of temptation and testing, without love and hope, and without true Christian practices. And everyone wants to remain in their own vices and in all the old ways of these common, ceremonial, and antichristian practices about baptism and the Lord’s Supper. They despise the divine word and pay attention to the papal word, or to the word of the antipapal preachers, which is also not in conformity with the word of the divine word.27

Also, Grebel, in the final part of the above letter, argued against any effectiveness of infant baptism, clarifying his understanding of baptism as follows.

Scripture says that baptism washes away sins through faith and the blood of Christ (completely transforming the mind of the baptized person and

25 Walter Klassen, Anabaptism, 17. 26 William R. Estep, The Anabaptist Story, 90. 27 Conrad Grebel, “Letter to Thomas Muntzer,” inThe Radical Reformation, ed. & trans. Michael G. Baylor (Cambridge: Cambridge University, 1991), 37. 176 KOREA PRESBYTERIAN JOURNAL OF THEOLOGY Vol. 49 No. 3

believer). It means that a person should be dead to sin and should walk in a newness of life and spirit, and that one is certainly saved if through inner baptism one realizes the inner meaning of faith.28

In the disputation before the city council of Zurich in 1525, Conrad Grebel and George Blaurock took the lead in the disputes with their fellow clergy, Zwingli and Leo Jud, over the question of infant baptism. Now, the “radicals” found infant baptism unscriptural and irrational, but those City Reformers defending infant baptism, supported it as being both biblical and rational. At the disputations under their chief men, Grebel, Manz, and Blaurock assembled in the town to attack Zwingli, along with Leo Jud and Kasper Grossmann, and they refuted infant baptism with force, as follows.

Christ says, “Go ye therefore and teach all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Spirit.” It is plain from this passage that mankind are to be taught before they be baptized.29 What God wills that we should do, He has expressly commanded in His Word. He has, however, nowhere commanded infant baptism, and Christ and His apostles have never practiced it; it is therefore an invention of men, or of Satan, and thereby we abide.30

Pointing to the first error in his writing A Form for Water Baptism, Hubmaier said that all people in all of Europe, with the only exception of the Picards, the Russians, the Muscovites, and the Walachians, had missed “the path of truth in that we have baptized children, although it was no baptism, since they did not yet know what God, Christ, baptism, faith, or vow is.”31 After a long trial on the day of his departure from this world, as to the third article against himself, Michael Sattler32

28 Ibid., 43. 29 R. Christoffel, Zwingli, 259. 30 Ibid., 272. 31 Pipkin H. Wayne & John H. Yoder, Balthasar Hubmaier, 389-90. 32 Michael Sattler(1490-1527) was one of the Waldensian brethren, and, an out- Baptismal Controversy between Anabaptists and City Reformers in the 16th Century Reformation 177 answered “infant baptism is of no avail to salvation; for it is written, that we live by faith alone. Again, he that believeth and is baptized shall be s av e d .” 33 That is to say, the Anabaptist tradition of baptism affirms not only the sovereignty of God in salvation, but also makes full allowance for the genuinely free and responsible role of repentance and faith as constitutive for the act of baptism. At first, Zwingli had also opposed infant baptism as he had himself advocated the removal of all ornaments from the churches. It was true that in his earlier addresses from the pulpit Zwingli exposed the unbiblical character of the church doctrine upon the general subject of baptism and probably inclined towards ruling out infant baptism, “as lacking biblical support.”34 But when it became evident that the gathering of a church by the believers’ baptism and the maintenance of a state church were not compatible, Zwingli held to the latter line.35 In the first writing, Of Baptism(May, 1525),36 defending infant baptism, Zwingli clearly affirmed that children were to be baptized, and thereafter, undertaking to speak against the Anabaptists at the public disputation of November 1925, rebutted the objections of his opponents as follows.

The passage in the Greek runs very differently from the way in which you interpret it; for what we translate by “teach” is, in the original, “Make to disciples.” Accordingly, the passage in the Greek text runs exactly so, Go ye, make all nations my disciples, baptizing them in the name of the Father, of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost: teaching them to observe all things whatsoever I have commanded you. ... Even although the words were interpreted in your favor, they have no bearing at all on

standing Anabaptist leader and martyr of the South Germany. 33 Thieleman J. van Bracht, The Bloody Theater or Martyrs Mirror of the Defenseless Christians (Waterloo: Herald, 1950), 417. 34 Samuel M. Jackson, Ulrich Zwingli: Selected Works (Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania, 1901), 123-24. 35 F. H. Littell, The Anabaptist View of the Church, 13. 36 Also, Zwingli’s last work, In catabaptistarum strophas elenchus (1527), was the refutation of two different statements on the Anabaptist position; firstly, a tract probably written by Conrad Grebel, and, the second, a document commonly called the Schleitheim Confession. 178 KOREA PRESBYTERIAN JOURNAL OF THEOLOGY Vol. 49 No. 3

the baptism of children, so that they may not be baptized before the doctrinal baptism. The Jews and heathens were to be made disciples of Christ by doctrinal and water-baptism, but the children of believers belong already to the Church of Christ, as also the children of the Israelites belonged to the people of God.37 Now “the dying unto sin” and “the circumcision from sin” is one and the self-same thing, which, in the one case, is signified by outward circumcision; and in the other, by baptism ... Hence it is evident that baptism in the New Testament had come into the place of circumcision in the Old. Again, as to what regards the origin of infant baptism, there is in my mind no doubt that it was begun, as Augustine says, at the time of Christ and the apostles, although no mention is made of it in express words.38

In summary, for the Anabaptists, water baptism as confession of faith was essential for the life of the church, though it is not necessary for salvation. Also, baptism has a cooperative meaning as a sign of the believer’s commitment to Christ and submission to his fellow believers in the church. But while Anabaptism maintained that infant baptism is not baptism and does not have any significance for salvation, the city Reformers including Zwingli supported infant baptism, grounding its origin on the covenantal continuity of the Old and New Testaments.

III. SIGNIFICANCE OF BAPTISMAL CONTROVERSIES IN THE DEVELOPMENT OF THE REFORMED TRADITION IN THEOLOGY

It has been argued that the Reformed baptismal rites were worked out in the process of fighting against the two fronts: the old Latin rites on one hand, and the Anabaptist approach on the other hand. In other words, any study of the early Reformed baptismal rites and

37 R. Christoffel, Zwingli, 260. 38 Ibid., 273. Baptismal Controversy between Anabaptists and City Reformers in the 16th Century Reformation 179 theology should not overlook the City Reformers’ confrontations with the Anabaptists’ revolt in conflicting opinions on the issues of the time, especially in the vein that the Anabaptist movement gave the challenges and depths to the development of the Reformed tradition in theology.39 At last, the fraternal relationship between Zwingli40 and Hubmaier of Waldshut, one of the few trained theologians of the Anabaptist movement41 came to an end as the first half of 1525 approached at the end. The main issue which pushed Zwingli and Hubmaier, former friends, to a deadlock was the question of baptism, around which the great literary fights of 1525 revolved. Especially, with the pamphlet, He Who Causes Insurrection, and by the position he took in the disputation on baptism held on January 17, 1525, Zwingli finally took a position in favor of infant baptism.42 Yet, from the main issue, infant baptism, they went on to deal with other basis and theological questions: e.g. Scripture, anthropology/human beings in free will, and the relation of church and state etc. The attempts to contrast the strategies of Hubmaier and

39 Hughes O. Old, “Origins of the Reformed Baptismal Rites in the Sixteenth Century,” 199. 40 The Anabaptists forced Zwingli to develop a doctrine of baptism. His first formulation was in his book, He Who Causes Insurrection (1524). In fact, he had already set forth his doctrine of the Church in his Exposition of the Sixty-seven Theses (1523). During the years from 1525 to 1527, with Anabaptist debates at their height, Zwingli made his fullest defense of baptism as follows. At first, Zwingli repeated his ecclesiological views in the dogmatic work De vera et falsa religione commentarius (March 1525). Then, Zwingli published On Baptism, Rebaptism, and Infant Baptism (May 1525) in which he elucidated in detail his view of baptism. Especially, to his work, Zwingli appended a new baptismal rite. According to Hughes O. Old’s The Shaping of the Reformed Baptismal Rite in the Sixteenth Century, 62, “although this work is not a full presentation of the doctrine of baptism but rather a polemical tract against the Anabaptists, we nevertheless find in it the beginnings of lines of thought which in the course of time have become characteristic of the Reformed theology of baptism.” And his An Answer to Balthasar’s Booklet on Baptism (November 1525) was an attempt to refute Hubmaier’s book (Summer 1525). In the period 1525-1527, the opposition between Zwingli and his supporters, on the one hand, and the Anabaptists, on the other hand, had increased, and, in 1527, Zwingli produced his work, Reputation of the Tricks of the Catabaptists. 41 Hughes O. Old, The Shaping of the Reformed Baptismal Rite in the Sixteenth Cen- tury, 94. 42 Torsten Bergsten, Balthasar Hubmaier: Anabaptist Theologian and Martyr, trans. Irwin J. Barnes & William R. Estep (Valley Forge: Jusdon, 1978), 195. 180 KOREA PRESBYTERIAN JOURNAL OF THEOLOGY Vol. 49 No. 3

Zwingli in approaching to those theological issues enlighten clear the essential elements of the earliest baptismal theology in the developing stage of the reformed tradition.

1. Scripture – sola Scriptura

The one significant touchstone of the Reformation and the clearest line of distinction between Roman Catholics and Reformers was the authority of the Scriptures. The Reformation principle of sola Scriptura was the bedrock on which the Zurich reformation was built: it was on this same foundation that the Anabaptist movement also rested when it emerged in Zurich in 1525.43 Yet, as Estep says, within the Reformation no group took the principle of sola Scriptura in matters of doctrine and discipline more seriously than the true Anabaptists did.44 Many features of the Anabaptist ‘primitive’ theology and worship seem much closer to the practice and experience of the Apostolic Church than any Protestant innovations, and any return to the apostolic faith should be founded upon the Bible.45 The first Anabaptists, Felix Manz, Conrad Grebel, and Wilhelm Reublin, drew on Scripture from the Gospels and the Acts of the Apostles, and pointed out that the apostles had not baptized infants but only adults, that is, discerning people. They “linked water baptism to the Reformation dictum of salvation by faith: first hear the Gospel, repent, believe and then accept baptism as an outward sign of that faith and a pledge of obedience.”46 The great importance of Scripture in the Anabaptist baptismal theology can be explained with the fact that a ‘small bible study group’ was the heart of the Anabaptists’ communal life.47 The Bible reading groups trained lay leaders to interpret the Bible and to express

43 C. Arnold Snyder, “The Birth and Evolution of Swiss Anabaptism(1520-1530),” Mennonite Quarterly Review 80 (Oct. 2006), 504. 44 William R. Estep, The Anabaptist Story, 190. 45 Constantine Prokhorov, “Anabaptism in Neither Catholic nor Protestant,” Theological Reflections: Euro-Asian Jounal of Theology No. 4 (2004), 152. 46 C. Arnold Snyder, “The Birth and Evolution of Swiss Anabaptism(1520-1530),” 538. 47 Cornelius J. Dyck, ed., Spiritual Life in Anabaptism (Scottdale: Herald, 1995), 14. Baptismal Controversy between Anabaptists and City Reformers in the 16th Century Reformation 181 themselves in meetings. In the process of the Anabaptist movement, the result of openly airing differences, in public places and through the press, was confusion and bewilderment of serious proportions, especially among the lower and poorer classes. According to Harold H. Schaff, in such circumstances, the one comfort which remained for many of these people was the Bible, now in the vernacular and within reach of all; and in every case of doubt in religious respect, each was inclined to support oneself by pleading for the Scriptures according to his or her own interpretation.48 The first concern on which I want to focus here, while referring to the importance of Scripture, is how different Hubmaier and Zwingli are in their interpretations of Scripture. According to Hubmaier’s On the Christian Baptism of Believers,49 it is enough to be baptized simply as commanded by Christ and the apostles in a number of passages of Scripture. It is only necessary for the reader to judge with his own conscience according to the simple Word of God.50 Hubmaier declares, “Neither the original languages, nor the history of Christian worship, nor investigations of the history of the doctrine, nor the opinions of the ‘big-name theologians’ of the past will be any help in deciding the question.”51 Thus, rejecting both medieval Scholastic exegesis with its great respect for tradition and the classical Protestant method of exege- sis, Hubmaier took a very private sort of personal illuminism.52 Judging the “historical-grammatical” method of exegesis which the early Re- formers had inherited from the Christian humanists as valueless, Hub-

48 Harold H. Schaff, “The Anabaptists, the Reformers, and the Civil Government,” Church History 1/1 (Mar. 1932), 28. Here, Schaff continues to write, the Evangelicals “made it practically a duty for each to turn to the Scriptures in order to assure himself of salvation, and in order that he be able to distinguish between true and false doctrines.” 49 Balthasar Hubmaier, Von dem Christlichen Tauff der glaubigen, in Quellen zur Geschichte de Taufer, vol. 9, 116-63. This writing was a reply to Zwingli’s short defense of the baptism of children, On Baptism, Rebaptism and Infant Baptism. 50 Hughes O. Old, The Shaping of the Reformed Baptismal Rite in the Sixteenth Cen- tury, 96. 51 Hubmaier, Von dem Christlichen Tauff der glaubigen, 120-21. 52 Hughes O. Old, The Shaping of the Reformed Baptismal Rite in the Sixteenth Cen- tury, 97. 182 KOREA PRESBYTERIAN JOURNAL OF THEOLOGY Vol. 49 No. 3 maier challenged the reader to only decide with his own conscience.53 Rhetoric and grammar could not be admitted to subvert the “simple” understanding of the Word of God.54

Then judge in your own conscience and understanding according to the simple Word of God … and you can be well assured that you will not err.55

According to Zwingli, baptism is an objective, public pledge sign by which one joins the visible community of God, established by God’s word and ethically governed by God’s word. By this insistence on the public, objective nature of the human pledge, Zwingli attempted to ground baptism not on the subjective faith of believers, as he thought the Anabaptists did, but on the Word of God.56 Furthermore, as Hughes O. Old’s understanding of Zwingli’s Refutation of the Tricks of the Catabaptists (July 1527) emphasizes,57 Zwingli, who was amazingly clear-sighted as to his method of interpreting Scripture and, in fact, a pioneer in grammatical-historical exegesis, insisted that the biblical texts should be heard in their historical context. So to speak, when the texts are heard in their historical context, it could be expected that “although children are not specifically mentioned in those texts, the writers assumed them to be included.”58 As Bainton rightly pointed

53 Ibid., 96. 54 Ibid., 117. 55 Balthasar Hubmaier, Von dem Christlichen Tauff der glaubigen, in Quellen zur Geschichte der Taufer, 121. As Bainton writes, for the Anabaptists, the restoration of primitive Christianity and the spiritual new birth were practically synonymous. Bainton continues, “The gift of the spirit which they craved had a twofold function: to produce, on the one hand, moral transformation and, on the other, to give religious knowledge. Here lay the root of the distinction between the outer and the inner word.” Roland H. Bainton, “The Left Wing of the Reformation,” 129. 56 John W. Riggs, “Reformed Thoughts: On Baptism and A Rite of Christian Initiation,” Reformed Liturgy and Music (Fall 1985), 180. 57 Ulrich Zwingli, Refutation of the Tricks of the Catabaptists, in Zwingli: Selected Works, ed. Samuel M. Jackson, 123-258. 58 Hughes O. Old, The Shaping of the Reformed Baptismal Rite in the Sixteenth Cen- tury, 117. Baptismal Controversy between Anabaptists and City Reformers in the 16th Century Reformation 183 out, the distinction between the outer and the inner word played its role here; while, for the champions like Anabaptists, the letter of the Scripture will convince only the convinced, – to understand the apostles we must be in the spirit of the apostles, the City Reformers like Luther, Zwingli, Calvin relied on the outer word.59 The another difference of Hubmaier and Zwingli is found in their understanding of the relation between the New Testament and the Old Testament. Hubmaier took the moral and ethical axioms of the New Testament seriously,60 and desired that the practices and virtues of the New Testament church be re-established in his own church. A prime prerequisite for the saints of the community was that they should live godly lives to the standards of the New Testament. Hubmaier said that the saints were assembled, established, and ruled on earth through the sole, living and divine word.61 Furthermore, Hubmaier’s tendency was to increase the distance between the Testaments in order to stress the uniqueness of the saving activity of God in the New Testament and to suffocate the arguments for infant baptism at their source.62 But, Zwingli intended to lessen the distance between the Old and New Testaments in order to justify analogies between circumcision and infant baptism. Preaching through the book of Genesis, Zwingli began to appreciate the great importance of the concept of covenant to the whole of biblical theology in the sense that “a covenant is far more than a contract between mutually consenting parties.”63 As a result, Zwingli took the position that the initiation of children into Christianity by

59 Roland H. Bainton, “The Left Wing of the Reformation,” 129. 60 The Anabaptists, while holding to the Bible as the Word of God, made the New Testament alone normatively for the Christian life. According to Estep, the Anabaptist characteristic distinction between the Old and New Testaments is most clearly enunciated in the work of Pilgram Marpeck. Cf. William R. Estep, The Anabaptist Story, 193-94. 61 Balthasar Hubmaier, Die zwolf Artikel des christlichen Glaubens, in Quellen zur Geschichte der Taufer, 218. 62 David C. Steinmetz, “The Baptism of John and the Baptism of Jesus in , Balthasar Hubmaier and Late Medieval Theology,” in Continuity and Disconti- nuity in Church History, ed. Forester Church and Timothy George (Leiden: E. J. Brill, 1979), 181. 63 Hughes O. Old, The Shaping of the Reformed Baptismal Rite in the Sixteenth Cen- tury, 124. 184 KOREA PRESBYTERIAN JOURNAL OF THEOLOGY Vol. 49 No. 3 baptism was comparable to the initiation of infants into Judaism by circumcision.64 Having given a long exposition of the biblical teaching on the covenant in his Refutation of Baptist Tricks, Zwingli argued that children should receive the sign of the covenant because they are specifically included in the eternal covenant as it is given to Abraham, whose sign is to give circumcision.

It results then after all this that just as the Hebrews’ children, because they with their parents were under the covenant, merited the sign of the covenant, so also Christians’ infants, because they are counted within the church and people of Christ, ought in no way to be deprived of baptism, the sign of covenant … 65

Zwingli’s colleagues, especially Bucer and Bullinger, developed the theology of the covenant by emphasizing the sameness, or, at least, analogies of circumcision and baptism, and the unity of the two covenants. In a word, to the city Reformers, baptism was a sign of the covenant.

2. Human Beings/Free Will in Salvation – sola Fide, sola Gratia

The Anabaptists took the demand for faith, and declared that there is no sacrament without faith. It meant that those baptized as infants, therefore, received no baptism at all, and needed to be baptized when they did profess their own faith. Furthermore, the Anabaptists insisted that baptism should be given to those who could be firm in intellectual commitment in matters of doctrine and life style.66 In the same vein, the Anabaptists stressed both the corporate character of salvation and

64 As G. R. Potter says, Zwingli’s main scriptural arguments were based on the fact that the baptism of John preceded that of Christ, that baptism replaced circumcision and that the apostles had baptized children. G. R. Potter, Zwingli, 190. 65 Ulrich Zwingli, Refutation of the Tricks of the Catabaptists, in Zwingli, ed. Samuel M. Jackson, 235. 66 Martha P. Blunt, “Baptism: Dry Cleaning or Water Bath?,” Reformed Liturgy and Music 19 (1985), 188-92. Baptismal Controversy between Anabaptists and City Reformers in the 16th Century Reformation 185 the ability of the individual to cooperate with God’s grace in the course of salvation. Rightly, at this point, the Anabaptists were very different from the major strains of the Reformation that stressed upon the humanly condition of absolute helplessness of individuals before God in the aspect of affecting salvation. Therefore, the anthropology of the Anabaptists, that is, their understanding of the human beings’ qualification of free will to cooperate or resist God’s grace was, rather, very close to the one of the Roman Catholicism on human will, justification, and merit.67 For example, Hubmaier’s approach to baptismal theology presup- poses free will. He provided for free will in his trichotomous anthro- pology, according to which free will was not completely lost by the Fall, but was only wounded and needed to be healed by the death of Christ.68 Like Erasmus,69 the Anabaptists leaders taught the freedom of the will and were somewhat optimistic about the possibilities of human improvement. In his writing on the freedom of the will(1527),70 Hub- maier took issue with the Protestant doctrine of bondage of the will. He insisted that, if we teach that we are saved by faith alone, and at the same time teach that we have no free will, this becomes nothing more than an excuse to continue in sinful living. Concerning this aspect, Hughes O. Old concludes that “the Anabaptists were, to be sure, not so much rationalists as they were voluntarists, who believed that one receives salvation through an act of the will.”71 While Hubmaier did not doubt that human will is fallen, he had a stronger belief in the power of regeneration than the mainline .72 According to

67 Daniel Liechty, Early Anabaptist Spirituality, 1. 68 Eddie L. Mabry, The Baptismal Theology of Balthasar Hubmaier (Ann Arbor: University Microfilms International, 1982), v. 69 The original Swiss Anabaptist leaders were highly educated young men, students at the universities or sometimes priest, and, accordingly, the influence of humanist learning was very strong among them. And this influence was seen especially among the circle of Conrad Grebel in Zurich. 70 On Free Will, in Spiritual and Anabaptist Writers, ed. J. Baillie, J. T. McMeill, H. P. Van Dusen, The Library of Christian Classics 25 (Philadelphia: Westminster, 1961), 112- 35. Von der Freiheit des Willens, in Quellen zur Geschichte der Taufer, 9, 379-97. 71 Hughes O. Old, The Shaping of the Reformed Baptismal Rite in the Sixteenth Cen- tury, 135. 72 Daniel Liechty, Early Anabaptist Spirituality, 21. 186 KOREA PRESBYTERIAN JOURNAL OF THEOLOGY Vol. 49 No. 3

Hubmaier, the believing Christian enters the restoration of freedom of the will and becomes responsible for the decision to sin or not to sin.

Now note this well who has ears, hear! We have been set free again through the sent word and truth of God, through God’s only begotten Son Jesus Christ. Therefore, there is certainly true health and freedom again in the people after the restoration from the fall. For God always works in our willing and doing according to a good conscience. And although the flesh does not want this, it must act according to the united will of the soul and spirit.73

Hubmaier’s baptismal theology, thus, presupposes a concept of faith which includes a voluntary initial belief on the part of man, as well as a justifying faith as a gift of God through grace. Both of these are necessary for the inner baptism of the spirit, which validates water baptism and baptism of the blood.74 Ultimately, for Hubmaier, salvation was gained neither by the medieval sacramental system nor by faith, but rather by the conversion experience. If, therefore, the center of the Anabaptist ordo salutis is the inward “yes,” the faith decision for Christ, then the baptism of children can’t find its ground.75 Inasmuch as infants cannot have that faith, the Anabaptists argued, only believing adults should be baptized. In his writings from 1525 to 1527, in contrast to and against the Anabaptists, Zwingli shifted the discussion of baptism away from the human side of the covenant toward the divine side of the covenant. So, in particular, in his reply to Hubmaier, Zwingli asserted that the covenant is God’s gracious covenant, accomplished not by human faith but by God’s gracious promise.76 In his Refutation of the Tricks of the Catabaptists(1527), Zwingli says about the significance of God’s

73 Balthasar Hubmaier, Von der Freiheit des Willens, in Schriften, 390. 74 Eddie L. Mabry, The Baptismal Theology of Balthasar Hubmaier, v. 75 Hughes O. Old, The Shaping of the Reformed Baptismal Rite in the Sixteenth Century, 100. 76 John W. Riggs, “Reformed Thoughts: On Baptism and A Rite of Christian Initia- tion,” Reformed Liturgy and Music (Fall 1985), 180. Baptismal Controversy between Anabaptists and City Reformers in the 16th Century Reformation 187 relation to the people of God, as follows.

These, I say, were the fathers, whom we call patriarchs and prophets, to whom the promises were made, and they came of the Israelites, the people of God. … The Israelites were God’s people with whom he entered into covenant, whom he made especially his own, to whom also he gave a sign of his covenant from the liest to the greatest the greatest, because high and low were in covenant with him, were his people and were of his church.77

In thinking out their reply to the Anabaptists, the Reformers were very much aware that the Anabaptists were a reaction against their Augustinian theology.78 But the revival of Augustinian theology with its strong emphasis on the primary of grace encouraged the Reformers to believe that God took the initiative for humankind’s salvation.79 The Reformers’ approach to infant baptism was thoroughly consistent with their Augustinian theology,80 that is, a strong doctrine of grace, which explains very explicitly that our salvation rests not on any knowledge or work or experience or decision of our own, but entirely on the grace of God.81 Therefore, the fact that the Reformers insisted on shaping the rite of baptism according to God’s word shows significantly that they considered baptism a divine act.82

3. Church and State - corpus Christianum

In any Protestant attempt to find an acceptable view of the church,

77 Ulrich Zwingli, Refutation of the Tricks of the Catabaptists, 227. 78 Hughes O. Old says that at the heart of the Protestant Reformation was the revival of Augustinian theology with its emphasis on the primacy of grace. Hughes O. Old, The Shaping of the Reformed Baptismal Rite in the Sixteenth Century, 139. 79 Hughes O. Old, “Origins of the Reformed Baptismal Rite in the Sixteenth Cen- tury,” 203. 80 Ibid., 203. Of course, this Augustinian theology had already revived as an attack on the Roman Catholic Church before the outburst of the Anabaptist zeal began. 81 Old, The Shaping of the Reformed Baptismal Rites in the Sixteenth Century, 139. 82 Ibid., 140. 188 KOREA PRESBYTERIAN JOURNAL OF THEOLOGY Vol. 49 No. 3 it is argued that our first resort should be to the writings of the six- teenth-century reformers.83 The reason that the problem of baptismal understanding became a very crucial issue in the earliest stage of the Reformation was that it was one of the most important dividing lines between the two systems, the state church and the primeval church, and that it afforded the secular authorities an excuse for suppressing the radicals by force.84 The Anabaptists came to believe in the nature of the church’s separation from the world. This idea was the seed of what we, in contemporary meaning, call the “separation of church and state,”85 and was a major innovation in the 16th century European history.86 Thus, it can be argued that one of the most controversial issues in the baptismal dispute between the Anabaptists and the City Reformers was not the act of baptism itself, but a rather bitter and irreducible struggle between the two mutually exclusive concepts of the church in the world. Finally, Zwingli was committed to the state church: the Anabaptists, on the other hand, were out to restore the apostolic Christianity, organized according to the explicit precepts of the New Testament.87 Baptism as a guaranteeing sign of entering the Christian community was important to governments and magistrates for social and political control, but what was most important to the Anabaptists was a regenerated church of believers.88 The tension between the Anabaptists and the prevailing assump- tions on the relationship of church and state was revealed at many

83 John T. McNeill, “The Church in Sixteenth-Century Reformed Theology,” The Journal of Religion 22/3 (July. 1942), 251. 84 F. H. Littell, The Anabaptist View of the Church, 14. 85 According to Littell, the separation of church and state which the Anabaptists represented involved at least two positive affirmations of vital religious significance: (1) the civic right of a free man to private religious interpretation, and (2) the Christian duty of the voluntary association to enforce a strong internal discipline. Littell says that these are two closely linked aspects of healthy congregational life. Littell, The Anabaptist View of the Church, 67. 86 Daniel Liechty, Early Anabaptist Spirituality, 1. In terms of their understanding of church and politics, it can be said that the Anabaptists were radicals indeed. 87 F. H. Littell, The Anabaptist View of the Church, 14. 88 Cornelius J. Dyck, Spiritual Life in Anabaptism, 14-15. Baptism was not central to faith of the Anabaptists as has often been assumed and as the names of Taufer or Anabaptist imply. Baptismal Controversy between Anabaptists and City Reformers in the 16th Century Reformation 189 events. In Zurich, in January, 1525, the refusal of Conrad Grebel and some others to have their newborn infants baptized turned out to be a political action, because the City Council passed a law which made the baptism of infants within eight days mandatory. The establishing of a new Christian community in Zurich on January 21, 1525 was also a political action, since it was considered a rupture of the unity of society.89 The Anabaptists had refused to confirm to governmental decrees in matters of faith, and especially Hubmaier’s doctrine of the relationship of the state and church90 was endorsed by many “main- line” Anabaptists,91 and it has been passed on by these to the later gen- erations of Anabaptists.92 In this procedure, the Anabaptist movement was characterized by an inner-worldly asceticism which, when coupled with a political theology of the two kingdoms, soon developed into pacifist and religious sectarianism.93

89 Walter Klassen, Anabaptism, 49. Klassen explained the political views of the Anabaptists under five main points, that is, 1) the refusal to participate in the magistracy, 2) the refusal to take the oath, 3) the refusal to participate in violence, 4) the insistence on religious freedom, and 5) the new economics. 90 Recently, explaining Hubmaier’s attitudes to the relation of church and state very neutrally, Kirk R. MacGregor writes this way, “On the Radical side, Hubmaier separated the spiritual role of the church from the physical role of the state. For Hubmaier, God has commissioned the church to reconcile individuals to God and nuture them to righteousness through preaching, apologetics, acts of charity, and administration of the sacraments. By contrast, God has sanctioned government to implement social justice ... and has placed the sword at the magistrate’s side to safeguard the good and defenseless from the depravity of the world.” Kirk R. MacGregor, “Hubmaier’ Death and the Threat of a Free State Church,” Church History and Religious Culture 91/3-4 (2011), 326. 91 As the Schleitheim Confession (1527) declared, the government’s magistracy is according to the flesh, but the Christians’ is according to the Spirit; their houses and dwelling remain in this world, but the Christians’ citizenship is in heaven. William R. Estep, Jr., ed., “The Schleitheim Confession” in Annabaptist Beginnings: A Source Book (Nieukoop: B. De Graaf, 1976), 103. 92 Eddie L. Mabry, Balthasar Hubmaier’s Doctrine of the Church, 204-205. 93 This Anabaptist sectarianism was crystallized in the fourth article of the Schleitheim Confession of 1527, which reads in part, “We have united concerning the separation that shall take place from the evil and the wickedness which the devil has planted in the world. ... We have no fellowship with them and do not run with them in the confusion of their abominations. ... Now there is nothing else in the world and all creation than good and evil, believing and unbelieving, darkness and light, the world and those who are come out of the world, God’s temple and idols, Christ and Belial, and 190 KOREA PRESBYTERIAN JOURNAL OF THEOLOGY Vol. 49 No. 3

Truly, the Anabaptists’ separatist faith experience and disciple- ship represented a revolutionary challenge to the sixteenth-century establishment of church and state, whether Catholic or Protestant. For example, when the first Anabaptists began to condemn infant baptism at Zurich, Zwingli realized that it meant a church separated from the state, and clarified his own thinking against them. To his eyes, by re- peating baptism, the Anabaptists had become “Sekter,” “Rotten,” and “Ketzer”(“sectarians,” “rebels,” and “heretics”).94 It was true that the believers’ baptism introduced shortly after the disputation of January 17, 1925, implied a significantly different view of the nature of church, which the mainline Reformers could hardly miss.95 While asserting that Lord of lords and King of kings is so far from needing magistracy that all magistrates draw their authority from heaven through the Lord, Zwingli supported the necessity of the magistracy of the lives of Chris- tians as follows.

I strive with all my powers against the proposition that Christian need no magistracy. … It is our misfortune that among men we do not find so absolute perfection, and may not hope to find that all who confess Christ are wholly happy, as long as we bear about this domicile of the body. Therefore, the saying: the sword is an ordinance of God outside of the perfection of Christ is true in this sense whether the members of Christ do not arrive at the measure of the perfection of the head there is need for the sword.96

In his Short and Clear Exposition of the Christian Faith addressed to Francis I in 1531, in which (chaps. vi, vii) his thought revolves around the relation of church and state, Zwingli affirms that, in the church, government is as necessary as preaching and that the church

none will have part with the other.” The full text is given in The legacy of Michael Sattler, ed. and trans. John H. Yoder (Scottdale: Herald, 1973), 28-44. 94 Torsten Bergsten, Balthasar Hubmaier, 292. 95 F. H. Littell, The Anabaptist View of the Church, 71. 96 Ulrich Zwingli, Refutation of the Tricks of the Catabaptists, 197. Baptismal Controversy between Anabaptists and City Reformers in the 16th Century Reformation 191 cannot exist without the civil government.97 As such, Zwingli was firmly committed to the state church, because he was determined to work within the de facto structures of the Swiss Church, and wanted a constitutional reform of the whole Swiss Church.98 In fact, Zwingli and the city magistrates had fully collaborated in the process of reform that institutionalized magisterial authority over the Church in Zurich, and the results of that process were fully based upon Zwingli’s own theory on the roles of church and state within the Christian community.99 Regarding the Anabaptists, it was the duty of the magistrates to restrain them and to punish all blasphemers in order to protect the church and the true religion. In this sense, Zwingli had preserved the medieval concept of the corpus Christianum,100 from which the separatist church of the Anabaptists broke away.101 Also, here we have to keep in mind the fact that Zwingli emphasized on the ecclesiological aspect of baptism, which, for him, baptism is an initiation or entrance into the Church.102

III. CONCLUSION

In summary, the baptismal conflicts between the two followers of humanism, Hubmaier and Zwingli, dividing each other, especially in regarding the way of using the Bible, clarified the difference be-

97 John T. McNeill, “The Church in Sixteenth-Century Reformed Theology,” 255. 98 Hughes H. Old, The Shaping of the Reformed Baptismal Rite in the Sixteenth Century, 87. 99 Wayne Baker, “Church, State, and Dissent: The Crisis of Swiss Reformation, 1531-1536,” Church History 57/2 (June 1988), 135-36. 100 The term “corpus Christianum” refers to the medieval concept of a unity of church and “state,” of spiritual and secular dominion. 101 Torsten Bergsten, Balthasar Hubmaier, 292. It is interesting to see that Luther and Zwingli, so divergent in other aspects of their thought, shared a common hostility to the radical movement, which is explained in Luther’s tracts against the peasants and his treatment of such radicals as Thomas Muntzer, and Zwingli’s approval of the persecution of Anabaptists in Zurich. Samuel M. Jackson, ed., Ulrich Zwingli (1484-1531): Selected Works, xxv. 102 Hughes H. Old, The Shaping of the Reformed Baptismal Rite in the Sixteenth Century, 62. 192 KOREA PRESBYTERIAN JOURNAL OF THEOLOGY Vol. 49 No. 3 tween illuministic exegesis103 and grammatical-historical exegesis.104 Hubmaier intended to increase the distance between the testaments in order to stress on the uniqueness of the saving activity of God in the New Testament and to stifle the arguments for infant baptism at their source. But Zwingli justified analogies between circumcision and infant baptism through putting a great emphasis on the unity of the Old and the New Testaments, and on the significance of the covenant con- cept to the whole of biblical theology. The fact that Zwingli was forced to find biblical grounds for upholding infant baptism reflects that so much emphasis upon the supreme and exclusive authority of the Bible is one of the essential features of the teachings, discussions and debates within the Reformed tradition.105 By the way, the Anabaptist leaders who were optimistic about the possibilities of human improvement, defended the human elements such as the freedom of will, and, thus, rejected double predestination, as Hubmaier said that the believing Christian individual enters the restoration of freedom of the will, and becomes responsible for the decision to sin or not to sin. Furthermore, Hubmaier’s baptismal theology presupposes a concept of unique faith, which includes a voluntary initial belief on the part of human being, as well as a justifying faith as a gift of God through grace. But, in contrast, Zwingli, one of the founding Reformed theologians, approached infant baptism with a consistent clinging to the tradition of the theology of covenant, entirely depending upon the providence of God. Later, Hein- rich Bullinger, succeeding Zwingli as head of the Zurich church and pastor at Grossmünster, emphasized that the covenant is God’s gracious covenant, accomplished not by human faith but through God’s gracious promise, and baptism is not a human act, but a divine one. Concern- ing another issue, the relation of church and state,106 the Anabaptists, having been out to restore apostolic Christianity, organized their own

103 It is not proper to simply classify the Anabaptists’ approach to the Bible as an illuministic exegesis, because they are usually called ‘biblicist’ or ‘literalists’, and often use “grammatical-historical exegesis.” 104 Ibid., 143-44. 105 G. R. Potter, Zwingli, 191. 106 The issue of the relation of church and state crucially affected the first Protestant persecutions of the Anabaptists. Baptismal Controversy between Anabaptists and City Reformers in the 16th Century Reformation 193 primitive groups according to the explicit precepts of the New Testa- ment, and, in contrast, Zwingli, firmly determined to work within the Swiss Church, condemned the baptism of adult believers, because he realized that the goal of the Anabaptists meant a church separated from the state. As Hughes O. Old’s work on the shaping of the Reformed rite, which intended to keep tract of the way of the Reformers’ responding to the theological crisis incited by the Anabaptists, shows, the City Reformers developed their baptismal rite, while struggling with the two different fronts; that are, the old Latin baptismal rites and the Anabaptist revolutionary movement at the same time.107 The controversies on infant baptism, particularly fired by the earliest Anabaptists, played a dominant and significant role in the City Reformers’ shaping the baptismal theology of the Reformed tradition.108 And the debates, even though they resulted in such tragic stories of the scandalous persecution, ironically stimulated the City Reformers to develop their principles of reformation, such as sola Scriptura, focused on the as the recovery of the Old Testament, sola Gratia, implying the inheritance of Augustinian theology/soteriology, and, ultimately, the vision of corpus Christianum, supported by the Reformed doctrine of the Holy Spirit. And resulting from these was firmly set up, the Reformed belief that baptism is just a sign under which the whole of Christian life, individually as well as in a community, is lived according to the covenant, succeeding through such faith as affirming “the sovereignty of God in salvation and the corporate character of the Christian community.”109

107 Hughes O. Old, The Shaping of the Reformed Baptismal Rite in the Sixteenth Century, 142-43. 108 Ibid., 144. 109 Timothy George, “The Reformed Doctrine of Believers’ Baptism,” Interpretation of The Reformed Doctrine of Believers’ Baptism 47/3 (1993), 242. 194 KOREA PRESBYTERIAN JOURNAL OF THEOLOGY Vol. 49 No. 3

Bibliography

Primary Sources

Hubmaier, Balthasar. Balthasar Hubmaier Schriften. Herausgegeben von Gunna Westin and Trosten Bergsten. Gütersloh: Verlagshaus Gerd Mohn, 1962. Zwingli, Ulrich. Zwingli (1484-1531): Selected Works. Edited by Samuel M. Jackson. Phila- delphia: University of Pennsylvania, 1901.

Secondary Sources

Bainton, Roland H. “The Left Wing of the Reformation.” The Journal of Religion 21/2 (Apr. 1941), 124-34. Baker, Wayne. “Church, State, and Dissent: The Crisis of Swiss Reformation, 1531-1536.” Church History 57/2 (Jun. 1988), 135-52. Bergsten, Torsten. Balthasar Hubmaier: Anabaptist Theologian and Martyr. Translated by Irwin J. Barnes & William R. Estep. Valley Forge: Jusdon, 1978. Blunt, Martha Page. “Baptism: Dry Cleaning or Water Bath?” Reformed Liturgy and Music 19 (1985), 188-192. Christoffel, R. Zwingli; the Rise of the Reformation in Switzerland. Edinburgh: T.&T. Clark, 1858. Dyck, Cornelius J. ed. Spiritual Life in Anabaptism. Scottdale: Herald, 1995. Estep, William R. The Anabaptist Story-an Introduction to 16th Century Anabaptism. Grand Rapids: W. B. Erdmans, 1996. George, Timothy. “The Reformed Doctrine of Believers’ Baptism.” Interpretation: The Re- formed Doctrine of Believers’ Baptism 47/3 (1993), 242-54. Harder, Leland. “Zwingli’s Reaction to the Schleitheim Confession of Faith of the Anabap- tists.” The Sixteenth Century Journal 11/4 (Winter 1980), 51-66. Herchberger, Guy F. The Recovery of the Anabaptist Vision. Scottdale: Herald, 1957. Klaasen, Walter. “The Anabaptist Critique of Constantinian Christendom.” Mennonite Quarterly Review 55 (Jul. 1981), 218-31. . Anabaptism: Neither Catholic nor Protestant. Waterloo: Conrad, 1973. Liechty, Daniel. trans. & ed. Early Anabaptist Spirituality: Selected Writings. New York: Pau- list, 1994. Littell, F. H. The Anabaptist View of the Church. Boston: Starr King, 1958. Mabry, Eddie Louis. The Baptismal Theology of Balthasar Hubmaier. Ann Arbor: University Microfilms International, 1982. . Balthasar Hubmaier’s Doctrine of the Church. London: University Press of America, Inc., 1994. Baptismal Controversy between Anabaptists and City Reformers in the 16th Century Reformation 195

MacGregor, Kirk R. “Hubmaier’s Death and the Threat of a Free State Church.” Church His- tory and Religious Culture 91/3-4 (2011), 321-48. McNeill, John T. “The Church in Sixteenth-Century Reformed Theology.” The Journal of Religion 22/3 (Jul. 1942), 251-69. Old, Hughes O. The Shaping of the Reformed Baptismal Rite in the Sixteenth Century. Grand Rapids: W. B. Eerdmans, 1992. . “Origins of the Reformed Baptismal Rites in the Sixteenth Century.” Re- formed Liturgy and Music 19 (Fall 1985), 196-204. Pipkin, H. Wayne. “The Baptismal Theology of Balthasar Hubmaier.” In Essays in Anabaptist Theology. Edited by H. Wayne Pipkin. Elkhart, In.: Institute of Mennonite Studies, 1994. Pipkin, H. Wayne & John H. Yoder. Balthasar Hubmaier: Theologian of Anabaptism. Water- loo: Herald: 1989. Potter, G. R. Zwingli. Cambridge: Cambridge University, 1976. Prokhorov, Constantine. “Anabaptism is Neither Catholic nor Protestant.” Theological Reflec- tions: Euro-Asian Journal of Theology 4 (2004), 146-60. Riggs, John W. “Reformed Thoughts: On Baptism and A Rite of Christian Initiation.” Re- formed Liturgy and Music (Fall 1985), 179-83. Schaff, Harold H. “The Anabaptists, the Reformers, and the Civil Government.”Church History 1/1 (Mar. 1932), 27-46. Snyder, C. Arnold. “The Birth and Evolution of Swiss Anabaptism.” Mennonite Quarterly Review 80 (Oct. 2006), 501-645. Stayer, James M. Anabaptists and the Sword. Lawrence: Conrad, 1972. Steinmetz, David C. “The Baptism of John and the Baptism of Jesus in Huldrych Zwingli, Balthasar Hubmaier and Late Medieval Theology.” In Continuity and Discontinuity in Church History. Edited by Forester Church and Timothy George. Leiden: E. J. Brill, 1979. Van Bracht, Thieleman J. The Bloody Theater or Martyrs Mirror of the Defenseless Christians. Waterloo: Herald, 1950. Vedder, Henry C. Balthasar Hubmaier: The Leader of the Anabaptists. New York: G. P. Put- nam’s Sons, 1905. Williams, George H. The Radical Reformation. Philadelphia: Westminster, 1962. 196 KOREA PRESBYTERIAN JOURNAL OF THEOLOGY Vol. 49 No. 3

한글 초록

“재세례 파와 도시 개혁자 간의 침례 논쟁 16세기 개혁과 신학의 개혁 전통 발전에 대한 의의 －츠빙글리와 하브 마이어의 글을 중심으로”

이승갑 한일장신대학교 교수, 역사신학

본 논문의 목적은 16세기 종교개혁 초기 발생한 재세례파와 츠빙글리를 비롯한 시(市)개혁가들 사이의 세례 논쟁을 고찰함으로써 초기 개혁가들 사이의 일련의 세례 논쟁이 스위스에서 출발한 개혁교회와 신학전통의 발전 과정에서 가지는 의의를 집 중 조명하는 것이다. 종교개혁은 또한 기독교 역사에서 가장 주목할 만한 전례(典禮) 상의 혁명의 시기였다. 영적, 도덕적, 사회적 갱신 측면들에서 하나의 급진적 운동으 로서 재세례파 그룹은 근대를 여는 사회/경제적, 정치적 사상의 발전에 기여했을 뿐만 아니라, 로마 가톨릭교회의 신학전통에 대립하는 개신교 신학사상의 발전을 가져왔다 고 볼 수 있는데, 특히 재세례파 지도자들이 동시대의 시(市)개혁가들을 도전하여 급 진적 목소리들에 대항해 자신들의 입장들을 변호하기 위해 신학적 견해들과 해석들을 구체적이고 발전적으로 진술하게 했다는 맥락에서 그렇다. 사실상, “좌파” 또는 “급 진주의자들”이라 불리지만, 재세례파 또한 자신들이 교회의 본질과 실제적 형태를 담 고 있다고 판단한 것으로서, 즉 신약성서가 보여주는 사도적 형식 위에 근본적으로 참 된 교회를 세우고자 했다. 따라서 종교개혁 초기 개혁교회 전통의 뿌리를 내렸다고 볼 수 있는 시(市)개혁가들이 세례 문제와 관련 재세례파와 가진 논쟁들과 갈등들은 종교 개혁의 예전 개혁의 과정에서 촉발된 신학적 이슈들을 성서와 고대교회 신학의 전통 에서 바라보게 했으며, 한 걸음 나아가 츠빙글리와 불링거 등 개혁신학 전통의 기초자 들에게 신학적으로 핵심이 되는 사항들이 무엇인가를 해석해 내는데 필요한 통찰들을 제공했다고 볼 수 있다. 본 논문을 통해 독자들은 종교개혁 초기 개혁가들이 전례상의 개혁의 문제로 충돌했다는 사실과 그 과정에서 확립된 종교개혁의 원리들에 대한 개 혁전통의 해석상의 특징적 측면들을 이해할 수 있을 것이다. 본 논문은 먼저 재세례파 와 취리히 개혁가들 사이의 세례논쟁들의 전개를 역사적으로 살펴보고, 다음으로 후 브마이어와 츠빙글리의 글들을 중점적으로 사용하여 세례논쟁들의 신학적 이슈들을 조명한 후, 끝으로 개혁신학의 정체성의 발전에 있어서 그들 세례 논쟁들이 가진 의의 를 성서해석의 방법, 구원론에 있어서 인간이해, 교회와 국가의 관계 등 주제들로 나 눠 숙고함으로써 ‘오직 성서’(sola Scriptura), ‘오직 은총’(sola Gratia), ‘그리스도의 몸/ Baptismal Controversy between Anabaptists and City Reformers in the 16th Century Reformation 197

기독교 국가’(corpus Christianum) 등 종교개혁의 핵심원리들에 대한 시(市)개혁가들 의 특징적 접근들을 고찰하였다.

주제어

재세례파, 예전 혁명, 발타자 후브마이어, 울리히 츠빙글리, 개혁 전통

Date submitted: June 30. 2017; date evaluated: July 25. 2017; date confirmed: July 31. 2017.