Although some Radical Reformers also held unscriptural beliefs, such as extreme pacifism or the ability for a person to lose their salvation, there is also evidence that some of them held to views that particularly resembled modern Free Grace viewpoints, that often makes the Free Grace movement resemble the 16th century Radical Reformation.
While modern Anabaptistic groups such as Mennonites are descendants of the Radical Reformation, they represent only few of the direct surviving strains of the movement, which showed far more wide ranges of belief in its early form.
Eternal Security
Free Grace Theology asserts that salvation is entirely a gift of God, not by any human effort, and that eternal life is granted solely through faith in Jesus Christ, apart from any subsequent good works or perseverance. This theological framework can be contrasted with both Calvinist and Arminian views, which often emphasize the necessity of works as evidence of saving faith or human cooperation in maintaining salvation.
Free Grace views of salvation seem to have appeared within the Anabaptist movement, as we see in the Augsburg confession, which states in Article XII:
"They condemn the Anabaptists, who deny that those once justified can lose the Holy Ghost. Also those who contend that some may attain to such perfection in this life that they cannot sin."
Other evidence of eternal security comes from Lutheran polemical writings, which although hostile, may indicate a form of eternal security which is not tied to perseverance:
Source: Process, wie es soll gehalten werden mit den Widertäuffern, p.6-8
Other incorrect articles which do not concern secular government... the born again can not fall into God’s wrath and when they commit adultery, they say they are driven by the Spirit.
This is a Lutheran polemical work against anabaptists written by eight theologians in 1558. In it, the Lutherans argued the anabaptists were to be condemned because of their beliefs and that the civil authorities were justified in punishing and executing them. This section conveys an anabaptist belief in eternal security which the Lutherans are condemning as incorrect. The second portion about adultery is probably a Lutheran interpolation critiquing the supposed ramifications of the anabaptist view. The Augsburg Confession in 1530 critiques anabaptists who believed that those who had been justified by God cannot lose the Holy Spirit in Article XII. This could lead the Lutheran theologians to falsely conclude that the ramifications of this theology are that when someone sins gravely they’re doing it in and being driven by the Holy Spirit since the Holy Spirit cannot be lost to one who has been justified; and the Holy Spirit would therefore accompany the believer in whatever sins they commit.
However, Anabaptism was not an unified movement. The Anabaptists held a wide range of beliefs on many issues, including salvation. However, even those Anabaptists who opposed eternal security seem to have been aware of its existence, as we see in the writings of Leupold Scharnschlager:
Even today some understand Christ and Paul as ascribing righteousness and life to faith alone, as if a faith without deeds and fruit is enough for salvation. For how can it be a barren, that is, a dead faith, when life—and much more—comes forth from it? (Reformation Commentary on Scripture, New Testament XIII: Hebrews, James. Edited by Ronald K. Rittgers. Downers Grove, IL: IVP Academic, 2017, p. 233)
However, despite these words of Leupold showing that he himself disagreed with the idea, he directly mentioned the doctrine being in existence by saying "even today some understand". Thus, we see the fact that Free Grace theology existed during the early 16th century from the writings of Leupold.
Anthropology
The Radical Reformers were often strictly opposed to Augustinian theology, and thus consequently, they resisted claims of infant damnation, and inherited guilt, for example, Radical Reformers such as Leupod Schiemer wrote the following:
But until that light shines in Children—that is, until they know the difference between good and evil—they remain innocent and will enter into the promised land. In this case we are not referring to the earthly land of Canaan but rather the heavenly Jerusalem." - Three kinds of grace in the Scriptures, Old and New Testaments, para. 15
This was also mentioned by the Radical Reformer Sebastian Franck, who although not an Anabaptist himself, he often symphatized with their teachings and still held to Radical Reformation beliefs. Franck wrote the following:
"Nearly all Anabaptists consider children to be of pure and innocent blood, and they consider original sin not a sin which of itself condemns both the children and the adults. They also claim that it does not make anyone unclean except the one who accepts this sin, makes it his own, brings forth fruits of it and is unwilling to part from it. For they claim foreign sin does not condemn anybody, and in this they refer to the Ezekiel 18." - Chronica, Zeitbuch und Geschichtsbibel, Fol. 446
However, this belief was condemned by the Lutherans, who taught that infants are saved through Baptism:
"Of Baptism they teach that it is necessary to salvation, and that through Baptism is offered the grace of God, and that children are to be baptized who, being offered to God through Baptism are received into God’s grace. They condemn the Anabaptists, who reject the baptism of children, and say that children are saved without Baptism." - Article IX
Thus, the Anabaptists rejected that infants born are born guilty, however they still maintained that we inherit consequences of sin, such as a sinful nature inclined to sin, which inevitably leads every human to sin and human mortality.
Rejection of infant Baptism
A major consequence of the Anabaptist rejection that Baptism is a means of grace was their rejection of infant baptism, instead teaching that only those capable of belief should be baptized. This view was often attacked by the Reformed confessions, as the Second Helvetic Confession (1566) reads:
"We condemn the Anabaptists, who deny that newborn infants of the faithful are to be baptized. For according to evangelical teaching, of such is the Kingdom of God (Luke 18:16), and they are in the covenant of God (Acts 3:25). Why, then, should the sign of God's covenant not be given to them? Why should those who belong to God and are in his Church not be initiated by holy baptism?" (chapter 20).
Infant baptism is also is also commonly rejected by modern Evangelicals, including those who hold to Free Grace theology.
Free Will
Unlike Lutherans and Calvinists, the Radical Reformers often saw unconditional election as unscriptural, instead holding to libertarian free will, breaking away from the medieval Augustinian views. Among these, a strong defence of free will was created by the moderate Anabaptist theologian, Balthasar Hubmaier, as he writes:
Grace comes to us, not out of us, so that no one can boast in himself but in the merits of our Lord Jesus Christ, 1 Cor 1:4. For our flesh and blood cannot reach such sonship out of their own power, John 1:12; Matt 16:17; 1 Cor 15:50. Since, however, this sonship is offered to all people equally, for the seed of the divine Word falls equally in four kinds of earth, it follows that we have the equal power to accept the seed and to bear fruit, John 1:12; Matt 28:19; Mark 16:15; Matt 13:3ff; Mark 4:3ff. If we do not do that, then it is not God who is guilty, or his seed, but the evil of the earth, that is, we ourselves. Thus Peter hears Christ, accepts his Word, and brings forth fruit, John 1:42. Herod also hears it, however, does not accept his Word, and does not bear fruit. Now that is the fault of the wickedness of Herod. Since, however, Peter and Herod are alike sinners and evil, the reason why his inborn evil does not harm Peter and yet harms Herod is that Herod follows his inborn evil and walks according to it, but not Peter, Eph 3; 1 Cor 15:45ff; Rom 8:5-9. In addition, the fact that God looks at Peter and moves him to lament his sins has to do with the mercy of God, Matt 26:75. That he does not look at Judas is the fault of the traitor who sold innocent blood for thirty pennies. He had to sentence himself and say, "I have sinned in that I have betrayed innocent blood," Matt 27:4. Whoever is not satisfied with this answer, namely, that the mercy of God is the cause of our salvation and our wickedness is the cause of our damnation, must ask God himself, Rom 11:11-12. I was not his advisor, nor was I with him in his council. Whoever says that God wills sin does not know what God or sin is. For sinning is always to do or to omit something against the will of God, 1 John 2:5-6. - Balthasar Hubmaier, "Freedom of the Will, II" in Balthasar Hubmaier: Theologian of Anabaptism, trans & ed. Pipkin & Yoder (1989), (p 468-469)
Thus, the Radical Reformers tended to reject both the Lutheran view of single predestination and the Calvinist view of double predestination, by rather holding that God gives us a genuine free will choice to either accept Christ or not. They also strongly resisted any claims that God decrees sin, as the Calvinists held.
Conclusion
The Radical Reformation in many ways showed support for concerns often held today by the Free Grace movement, such as on eternal security, free will, believers' baptism and opposition to strict Calvinistic views. Now, neither movement was a monolith, some Free Grace individuals such as Charles Ryrie were somewhat influenced by Calvinism, and many Radical Reformers were still not clear in their understanding of grace (including modern forms of Anabaptism), nevertheless, when looking at the Reformation period, it is the Radical Reformation where we can see many parallels between modern Free Grace and old Radical Reformation concerns,
No comments:
Post a Comment