Baylor, Michael G., ed. The Radical Reformation. Cambridge Texts in the History of
Political Thought. New York: Cambridge University Press, 1991.
Michael Baylor’s The Radical Reformation is a source book covering
similar territory as the previously reviewed book of his, The German Reformation and the Peasants’ War.[1]
The structure is the same–a collection of source materials in translation
preceded by an introduction referencing the following documents. The texts are
new translation prepared specifically for this volume, although many of the
works have been translated elsewhere.
Unlike The German Reformation and
the Peasants’ War the texts are unabridged. The series in which this volume
fits is political rather than theological. Therefore the primary representative
of the Radical Reformation is Thomas Müntzer and the article representing the
Peasants’ War more than the more theologically motivated movements in the
Radical Reformation such as Anabaptism. Unlike The German Reformation and the Peasants’ War Baylor had in view
also, even if only secondarily, Anabaptism’s social implications. These were
represented by Michael Sattler, Balthasar Hübmaier, Hans Denck and others.
Beyond the group of texts laying the political and theological groundwork for
peasant dissent, Baylor included several programs of the peasants outlining
their complaints and their vision for a new society.
Baylor’s interpretation of the political aspect of the Radical
Reformation is one toward which I am quite sympathetic. Rather than taking an
idealistic view that distances the Peasants’ War from the Radical Reformation,
Baylor recognized that the Reformation “absorbed preexisting socio-economic
grievances and political aspirations, and gained a revolutionary momentum”
(xi). As such, the political upheaval was not an aberration of the theological
movement of the Radical Reformation but rather was a push resulting from
Luther’s reformation. The radicals did not want to limit reforming activities
to the ecclesial realm. They wanted to include the social order within the
purview of the Reformation (xii).
Baylor was careful not to formulate too overarching a theological system
for the Radical Reformation, instead preferring to recognize the diversity of
the movement. The greatest cohesiveness to the movement in Baylor’s opinion was
its opposition to the magisterial reformers (xiv). He did make one step toward
unifying the movement by writing that the radicals did not separate the
“worldly” kingdom from the “spiritual” kingdom as had Luther (xviii). This
allowed the radicals to attempt to reform in both the social in addition to the
religious spheres. Baylor may have reached too far at this point. Although the Schleitheim Confession cannot be taken
as normative for much beyond Swiss Anabaptism, that strand of Anabaptism did
not fit Baylor’s mold.[2]
Schleitheim Anabaptism sought to limits its reforming activity more to the
spiritual kingdom by its teaching of separation. There were social implications
of Schleitheim Anabaptism, but these implications were worked out within the
orbit of the separated community, often times in the practice of community of
goods.
[1]Michael G.
Baylor, The German Reformation and the
Peasants’ War: A Brief History with Documents (Boston: Bedford St. Martins,
2012).
[2]It was the
doctrine of two worlds that Robert Friedmann found to be the “deepest layer” of
Anabaptist theology from which all other elements of the essence of Anabaptism
were derived. “The Essence of Anabaptist Faith: An Essay in Interpretation,” MQR
41, no. 1 (Jan. 1967): 8-9.
No comments:
Post a Comment