Mennonitica Helvetica

One of my long-term projects is building a comprehensive bibliography for the Radical Reformation. The latest to my knowledge are those of Hans Hillerbrand in 1962 and 1991[1] and of Nelson P. Sprunger and A. J. Klassen from 1977[2]. Whenever I read a work in the field, I’ll go through the footnotes and/or bibliography to include what’s being cited. Additionally, I’ll do searches through the normal modes and integrate works found in CVs of faculty who write on the subject. The purpose is to be as exhaustive as possible in one document.

I made it almost 1,900 items into this bibliography without coming across a reference to the Mennonitica Helvetica, a serial publication of the Swiss Society for Anabaptist History. I’m not sure how I found it myself. Nonetheless, considering my method, this journal does not seem to have broken through to the mainstream scholarship. I’m not sure what this says about the level of scholarship in the journal but I’ll try to get some copies and I’ll report here. The early issues, beginning in the late 1970s, seemed to include mostly shorter articles from a smaller pool of authors. Recently, the authorship has become more diverse and now includes articles by authors who are part of the mainstream scholarship in the field–Martin Rothkegel, Alejandro Zorzin, Martin Haas and Neal Blough.

The scope of the journal is Swiss Anabaptist History, not limited to the first century of Anabaptist history. There also appears to be an eye toward Strassburg throughout. The research is mostly in German but French language articles, quite rare for the field, have a strong showing. Below is a bibliography of the articles pertaining to sixteenth-century Anabaptism as best I can tell from the titles. This may be useful for those wanting to find sources for their research in these areas. For a complete article listing, not limited to early Anabaptist history: http://mennonitica.ch/mennonitica-helvetica/

Beacher, Claude, Maurice Baumann, Neal Blough, Ulrich J. Gerber and Marie-Noëlle von der Recke. “Die Herausforderung des Schleitheimer Bekenntnisse am die Gemeinden heute – L’entente fraternelle de Schleitheim: ses points de pertinence dans le contexte religieux d’aujourd’hui.” Mennonitica Helvetica 24/25 (2001/2002): 215-241.

Berger, Ulrich. “Der Lebensweg des Täufers und Schärers Ulrich Galli senior aus dem, Eggiwil.” Mennonitica Helvetica 32/33 (2009/2010): 237-258.

Blough, Neal. “Pilgram Marpeck et les Frères Suisses vers 1540.” Mennonitica Helvetica 11/12 (1988/1989): 147-164.

_________. “Nicolsburg et Schleitheim (1527): Deux expressions d’anabaptisme Suisse.” Mennonitica Helvetica 31 (2008): 27-41.

Caudwell, François. “Traduire Menno Simons.” Mennonitica Helvetica 20 (1997): 25-32.

_________. “Extrait de la Méditation sur le Pseaume 25 de Menno Simons.” Mennonitica Helvetica 20 (1997): 57-59.

Dellsperger, Rudolf. “Die Täuferdisputation von 1538 im Rahmen der bernischen Reformationsgeschichte.” Mennonitica Helvetica 11/12 (1988/1989): 67-82.

_________. “Der ‘Berner Synodus’: ‘. . . fleissig verlesen erläutert, ausgelegt, und erneuert . . .’” Mennonitica Helvetica 30 (2007): 213-242.

Fast, Heinold. “Aus täuferischer Sicht.” Mennonitica Helvetica 11/12 (1988/1989): 17-44.

Gerber, Abraham. “Die Altevangelisch Taufgesinnten Gemeinden (Mennoniten) der Schweiz.” Mennonitica Helvetica 1 (1977/1978): 3-8.

Gerber, Heinz. “Das ‘brüderliche Weissgeschirr’ der Hutterischen Täufer.” Mennonitica Helvetica 24/25 (2001/2002): 47-77.

Gerber, Jean-Pierre. “Das Liedgut der Wiedertäufer.” Mennonitica Helvetica 24/25 (2001/2002): 79-110.

Gerber, Ulrich J. “Die Reformation und ihr ‘Originalgewächs’: Die Täufer.” Mennonitica Helvetica 2 (1978/1979): 10-20.

_________. “Ikonographie des Schweizer Täufertums.” Mennonitica Helvetica 11/12 (1988/1989): 165-169.

_________. “Täuferische Predigtagenden.” Mennonitica Helvetica 23 (2000): 49-68.

_________. “Täufergemeinden und Landeskirchen. Die Differenz im Kirchenbegriff.” Mennonitica Helvetica 30 (2007): 71-96

Haas, Martin. “Die Berner Täufer in ihrem schweizerischen Umfeld I. Gesellschaft und Herrschaft.” Mennonitica Helvetica 30 (2007): 1-28.

Holenstein, André. “‘Ja, ja–Nein, nein’–oder war der Eid vom Übel? Der Eid im Verhältnis von Täufertum und Obrigkeit am Beispiel des Alten Bern.” Mennonitica Helvetica 11/12 (1988/1989): 125-146.

Hostettler, Paul. “Von den Täufern im Schwarzenburgerland, 1580-1750.” Mennonitica Helvetica 19 (1996).

_________. “Spuren täuferischer Auswanderung aus dem bernischen Voralpengebiet.” Mennonitica Helvetica 24/25 (2001/2002): 153-176.

Husser, Daniel. “Le pladoyer pour la tolérance de Caspar Schwenkfeld et de ses adeptes à Strasbourg (1529-1631).” Mennonitica Helvetica 7 (1984): 68-79.

_________. “Appel à la tolerance, adressé au Magistrat de Strassburg par Leupold Scharnschlager (juin 1535).” Mennonitica Helvetica 7 (1984): 80-85.

Jecker, Hanspeter. “Prüfet alles–das Gute behaltet. Wie Menno Simons einen reforierten Pfarrer von Murten nach Mähren reisen lässt.” Mennonitica Helvetica 20 (1997): 33-56.

_________. “‘Biss das gantze Land von disem unkraut bereinigt sein wird.’ Repression und Verfolgung des Täufertums in Bern – Ein kurzer Überblick zu einigen Fakten und Hintergründen.” Mennonitica Helvetica 30 (2007): 97-132.

Kobe, Rainer. “Die Täufer und der Zins bei Heinrich Bullinger.” Mennonitica Helvetica 31 (2008): 43-63.

Kocher, Hermann. “Die Disputation zwischen bernischen Prädikanten und Täufer vom 11.´Y17. März 1538.” Mennonitica Helvetica 11/12 (1988/1989): 9-16.

Krauss, Wolfgang. “Wachsen aus den Wurzeln. Geschichte schreiben! und Geschichte machen!.” Mennonitica Helvetica 31 (2008): 229-244.

Lavater, Hans Rudolf. “Berner Täuferdisputation 1538. Funktion, Gesprächsführung, Argumentation, Schriftgebrauch.” Mennonitica Helvetica 11/12 (1988/1989): 83-124.

_________. “Zur Schrift! Zur Schrift! Das Zürcher Bibelwerk, die Froschauer Bibel von 1534 und die Täufer.” Mennonitica Helvetica 13 (1990): 7-30.

_________. “Anmerkungen zur historischen Täuferstatistik.” Mennonitica Helvetica 23 (2000): 77-98

_________. “Miszellen zu Balthasar Hubmaier. I. Hubmaiers letzter Aufenthalt in Zürich 1525/26. II. Bildnisse Hubmaiers.” Mennonitica Helvetica 26/17 (2003/2004):

_________. “Die Berner Täufer in ihrem schweizerischen Umfeld II. Theologie und Bekenntnis.” Mennonitica Helvetica 30 (2007): 29-70.

_________.  “‘. . . von mir, der Arm, dass sich Gott über unß alli erbarm . . .” Zürcher Täuferakten des 17. Jahrhunderts in der Bayerischen Staatsbibliothek München.” Mennonitica Helvetica 32/33 (2009/2010): 109-187.

Leinhard, Marc. “Die Obrigkeit in Strassburg und die Dissidenten, 1526-1540.” Mennonitica Helvetica 7 (1984): 60-67.

Leu, Urs. “Die Froschauer-Bibeln und die Täufer. Die Geschichte einer jahrhundertealten Freundschaft.” Mennonitica Helvetica 28/29 (2005/2006): 47-88.

Locher, Gottfried W. “Felix Manz’ Abschiedsworte an seine Mitbrüder vor der Hinrichtung 1527.” Mennonitica Helvetica 8 (1985): 3-21.

_________. “Aus zwinglischer Sicht.” Mennonitica Helvetica 11/12 (1988/1989): 45-54.

Lutz, Samuel. “Der Berner Synodus Heute.” Mennonitica Helvetica 30 (2007): 243-264.

Marx, Theda. “Die Täufer und Luzern in der zweiten Hälfte des 16. Jahrhunderts? oder: Darf über die ‘Stillen im Lande’ gelacht werden?” Mennonitica Helvetica 31 (2008): 77-89.

Monge, Mathilde. “Reconnaître et se reconnaître anabaptiste à Cologne (1534-1610). Les pratiques d’identification comme témoins des échanges au XVIe siècle.” Mennonitica Helvetica 31 (2008): 65-76.

Rauert, Matthias H. “‘Ein schön lustig Büchlein’: Eine hutterischen Polemik unter dem einfluß von Pilgram Marpecks ‘Vermahnung’ zu rechter Taufe und Abendmahl.” Mennonitica Helvetica 31 (2008): 113-138.

Richter, Jan. “Die Nikolsburger Büstenreliefs des Balthasar Hubmaier und seiner Frau.” Mennonitica Helvetica 26/27 (2003/2004): 121-131.

Rothkegel, Martin. “Bildersturm und Musenreigen.” Mennonitica Helvetica 24/25 (2001/2002): 9-28.

Saxer, Ernst. “Die Christologie des Menno Simons im Vergleich zur Lehre der Reformatoren, insbesondere Calvins.” Mennonitica Helvetica 20 (1997): 11-23

Scheidegger, Christian. “Auf der Suche nach dem wahren Christentum. Schwenkfeldische Nonkonformisten in Zürich gegen Ende 16. Jahrhunderts.” Mennonitica Helvetica 31 (2008): 91-111.

von Schlachta, Astrid. “‘Konfessionalisierte Kunst’? oder der Widerspruch zwischen Gemeindeordnung und Marktanspruch.” Mennonitica Helvetica 24/25 (2001/2002): 29-46.

Scholl, Hans. “Calvin und die Täufer.” Mennonitica Helvetica 23 (2000): 5-32.

Schwantes, Siegfried. “L’ivraie et les hérétiques.” Mennonitica Helvetica 8 (1985): 22-27.

Séguy, Jean. “Anabaptisme et Agriculture.” Mennonitica Helvetica 3 (1979/1980): 32-33.

Springer, Joe A. “Das ‘Concordantz-Büchlein’ – Bibliographische Untersuchung einer vor 1550 entstandenen täuferischen Bibelkonkordanz.” Mennonitica Helvetica 24/25 (2001/2002): 115-152.

Uhlmann, Peter. “Täuferversteck in Fankhaus bei Trub.” Mennonitica Helvetica 3 (1979/1980): 2-4.

Ummel, Michel. “Trois témoins des débuts de l’anabaptisme.” Mennonitica Helvetica 26/17 (2003/2004): 133-185.

_________. “‘. . . Sonder den ausser ir statt bund land weisen . . .’ Exil, Auswanderung und Deportation im 16. bis 21. Jahrhundert.” Mennonitica Helvetica 30 (2007): 133-156/

_________. “La notion de ‘Frères suisses’ chez Harold S. Bender: Entre idéalisation et réhabilitation. A-t-elle encore un impact historique et théologique aujourd’hui?” Mennonitica Helvetica 31 (2008): 203-227.

_________. “Essai d’articulation de quelques principes de foi et de vie anabaptistes au XVIe siècle. De la Vision anabaptiste de H. S. Bender aux anabaptistes revisités.” Mennonitica Helvetica 32/33 (2009/2010): 9-107.

Würgler, Jean. “Personennachweise über Täufer.” Mennonitica Helvetica 4 (1980/1981): 44-45.

_________. “Ein Täuferfriedhof im Eierwald bei Sumiswald?” Mennonitica Helvetica 8 (1985): 62-65.

_________. “Un baptême en 1593.” Mennonitica Helvetica 15/16 (1992/1993): 223-227.

_________. “Présence anabaptiste dans le Clos du Doubs.” Mennonitica Helvetica 23 (2000): 69-76.

Zorzin, Alejandro. “Die Verbreitung täuferischer Botschaft in den Anfangsjahren der Schweizer Brüder (1524-1529). Täuferische Propaganda und reformatorische Publizistik–zwei unterschiedliche Kommunikationsstrategien.” Mennonitica Helvetica 31 (2008): 11-26.

Zürcher, Isaac. “Froschauer-Bibel aus dem Jahr 1536, mit Eintrag.” Mennonitica Helvetica 1 (1977/1978): 9-13.

_________. “‘Täufer’ auf und in Orts-, Flur- un Strasseennamen.” Mennonitica Helvetica 1 (1977/1978): 13-14.

_________. “Die Täuferhöhle [Bäretswil] mit einer Gedenktafel.” Mennonitica Helvetica 3 (1979/1980): 9-10.

_________. “Die Lochy. Unterirdische Fluchtorte in Mähren.” Mennonitica Helvetica 3 (1979/1980): 5-8.

_________. “Die Täuferbibeln I.” Mennonitica Helvetica 5 (1982): 10-43.

_________. “Versammlungsort der Täufer in der Verfolgungszeit.” Mennonitica Helvetica 5 (1982): 14-40.

_________.“Die Täuferbibeln II.” Mennonitica Helvetica 6 (1983): 13-56.

_________. “Die Täuferbibeln III.” Mennonitica Helvetica 7 (1984): 6-59.

_________. “Die ‘Täufernamen’ in der Schweiz.” Mennonitica Helvetica 8 (1985): 28-61.

_________. “Ein Täufer-Wasserfall.?” Mennonitica Helvetica 8 (1985): 66-70.

_________. ”Die Täufer um Bern in den ersten Jahrhundert nach der Reformation und die Toleranz.” Mennonitica Helvetica 9 (1986): 1-88.

Happy Researching!

---

[1]Bibliographie des Täufertums, 1520-1630, Quellen zur Geschichte der Täufer, Vol. 10 (Gütersloh: C. Bertelsmann, 1962).; A Bibliography of Anabaptism: 1520-1630, rev. ed. (St. Louis, Missouri, Center for Reformation Research, 1991).

[2]Mennonite Bibliography, 1631-1961, 2 vols. (Scottdale, Pennsylvania: Herald, 1977). This does not cover primary sources for sixteenth-century Anabaptism but some of the works reflect on those sixteenth-century origins.

Review of The Shaping of the Two Earliest Anabaptist Catechisms, by Jason J. Graffagnino

       Graffagnino, Jason J. “The Shaping of the Two Earliest Anabaptist Catechisms.” Ph.D. diss. Southwestern Baptist Theological Seminary, 2008.

Jason Graffagnino’s dissertation concerns the factors behind the development of the first two Anabaptist catechisms, by Balthasar Hübmaier and Leonhard Schiemer. His primary thesis was that the pluralistic and tolerant milieu of Moravia was fertile soil for Anabaptist catechesis (1). The established culture of variety of sects enabled the presence of yet another sect, Anabaptism. Also, the attendant Moravian tolerance yielded an atmosphere in which Anabaptist were not compelled to breath out controversy and polemic but rather to focus on entrenching their distinctive faith in future generations, the product of which was these catechisms (2).[1]

A chapter devoted to the Catholic tradition of catechesis led to the influence of Erasmus. Graffagnino essentially agreed with the school of thought that assigns to Erasmus a significant influence on Anabaptist theology. The two important milestones that Graffagnino addressed were the stress on piety (28ff.) and the call for renewed catechetical instruction, resulting in his own attempt at constructing one (37ff.).

Much space was spent on the development of the Unitas Fratrum out of the context from which it arose—namely the aftermath of Hussite dissent (ch. 3). Graffagnino set up signposts along the way of their development that would later serve as markers for connecting Hübmaier to this Moravian and Bohemian past. The narrative largely leads to an overview of the Kinderfragen, a Unitas Fratrum catechism that would be representative of their method and be the referent against which Hübmaier’s and Schiemer’s catechism would be compared. Graffagnino’s narrative of the group’s development progresses well from it’s 15th century beginnings, but when it reaches the Reformation period, precisely the period of interest, the narrative is much briefer. More attention to the synchronic state of Moravian dissent in the 1520’s would have been helpful.

Graffagnino’s argument for Unitas Fratrum catechisms’’ influence on Hübmaier’s Lehrtafel was shaped largely as a response to Jarold Knox Zeman’s contention that textual analysis did not merit a textual dependence of Hübmaier on the Unitas Fratrum (162ff.).[2] Zeman granted that there were several textual parallels between the Lehrtafel and the Kinderfragen, but this only reflected a polemic directed toward a common opponent, Roman Catholicism (165).

Graffagnino showed that there were two parallels that were unusual and thus might point toward dependence. The two catechisms were the only two that addressed Mary as pointing others to Jesus at Cana rather than only addressing her in her normal role as an object of adoration as the mother of Christ (165). Graffagnino also mentioned the use of the beatitudes in both. Both used the beatitudes in a similar context and this is particularly notable since Hübmaier never addressed the subject in full elsewhere in his corpus (165).

Also, Zeman may have not been complete in his analysis by limiting that analysis to textual evidence, both in word and concept. Graffagnino also observed both the catechetical practice and the personal contacts of Hübmaier as ways of providing a more complete picture. Prior to Hübmaier’s work in Moravia he did not include catechesis in the order of baptism. Once in Nikolsburg, however, he did include it in the same way that the Unitas Fratrum had (168).

Contacts that Hübmaier had could also have been a mark of influence. Martin Göschl, whom Graffagnino numbered among the Utraquists (144n), was a native Moravian and would thus have been well-acquainted with the catechetical practice of the Unitas Fratrum. It was Göschl who had commissioned Hübmaier to compose a catechism of his own (168). Also, Jan Ziesing, a former member of the Unitas Fratrum was counted among Hübmaier’s associates (170).

Graffagnino convincingly argued for the reliance of Hübmaier’s Lehrtafel on catechesis endemic to Moravian dissent. His discussion of Schiemer’s catechism, Von der Prob des Geistes, was not as robust. That discussion was more broadly about Schiemer’s theology, what it drew from Hübmaier and what remained in the legacies of Marpeck and the Hutterites. Graffagnino pointed in the direction that the Hutterites may have cast their catechetical system, even their comprehensive educational system, in the model of Schiemer’s own catechism (198). Since the development of Schiemer’s catechism, not its legacy, is the matter at hand, Graffagnino did not treat the subject fully (211), although the contentious claim might provide an interesting beginning point for further research against other possibilities behind the development of Hutterite catechesis.

After a review of Schiemer’s earlier thoughts on nominal Christianity, a concern for both Erasmus and Moravian dissenters, Graffagnino approached Prob des Geistes from two directions. Graffagnino first surveyed the major themes of the work, most prominently that of love as the mark of true Christianity (187ff.). He secondly reviewed the apparent reliance of Schiemer’s baptismal theology on Hübmaier (190ff.) While the discussion was brief, Graffagnino nonetheless highlighted the consistency of Schiemer’s catechism with the earlier catechisms mentioned earlier. Most importantly, Graffagnino provided the full text to Prob des Geistes in German (appendix 3) and in English (appendix 4), both transcribed and translated by Mitchell L. Hammond.[3]

Graffagnino respected the value that each author ascribed to Scripture. However, he also recognized that the authors were a product of their environment, concluding that the “multi-dimensional religious landscape of Moravia in the 1520s provided a climate in which a dissenting view such as Anabaptism could thrive” (205). That climate “allowed for both the composition of catechisms and necessitated the need for such documents in order to differentiate Anabaptism from other dissenting opinions” (Ibid). This was direct to Hübmaier, through whom it was mediated to Schiemer, then Marpeck and then ultimately to the Hutterites.

---

[1]Mark Dixon recently made the argument that Zwingli and Hübmaier’s polemics continued into their liturgies of the Lord’s Supper. “The Baptismal Forms of Huldrych Zwingli and Balthasar Hubmaier in Nikolsburg (1525-1527): Liturgy as Rhetoric.” Paper Presented to the Sixteenth Century Studies Conference, Cincinnati, Ohio, 25-28 October 2012. It would be worth evaluating whether the same is true for Reformation catechesis.

[2]Zeman’s arguments being found in The Anabaptists and the Czech Brethren in Moravia, 1526-1628 (The Hague: Mouton, 1969).

[3]A footnote explains that these appendices make no pretense of being a critical text or translation but are rather included for the sake of reference. From an initial reading, the text that was used, a copy from the city archive of Bratislava, seems to have lost its textual integrity. There are several questions for which the answers are blank. Also, some answers are not given in a way that can be universalized among all catechumens. To the question of when the catechumen became a Christian, the answer was “On the Monday after Catherine’s [feast day], A. D. 1527,” which is believed to be the date of Schiemer’s conversion (180n). The simplest resolution is that the catechumen would have understood that his or her own conversion was to be substituted for the date given. Before further analysis, a critical edition would be warranted from the Bratislava copy and a copy found at a Montana brüderhof by Robert Friedmann (“The Oldest Known Hutterite Codex of 1566: A Chapter in Anabaptist Intellectual History,” MQR 33, no. 2 (Apr. 1959): 96-107.) Both are microfilmed in Goshen.