ORGANISED RADICALS?

Now let’s turn to the second suggested definition of “radicalism” (see post of 17 June). Were the 16th century Anabaptists (or Radical Reformation) an organised body rather than spontaneous local outbursts?

Immediately there's a problem. Present-day readers or groups tend to filter the data according to their own position, then make history fit that scheme. So to devout Catholics, the Anabaptists were heretics; to staunch Lutherans, they were dangerous fanatics bent on revolution. Progressive Nonconformists try to claim them as theirs - though in fact there are serious points of divergence.

Hans-Jürgen Goertz acknowledges this in his book The Anabaptists. He reappraises the evidence dispassionately and concludes that the Radical Reformation was largely a local phenomenon and cannot be taken as a united movement, whether through leadership, practice or even theology.

So do we conclude that the Radical Reformation wasn't "radical" in the sense of my earlier post, because it wasn't organised? If you're looking for a national movement, then no, you won't find one. But Goertz misses two fundamental points. The first is that the Anabaptists were outlawed from the start; arrested and imprisoned as soon as discovered; many burned to death; whole colonies forced into exile. Under such conditions it is very hard to start a national movement!

Secondly, the Radical Reformation arose in Germany, Austria, Switzerland, and in time other countries eastwards, which were at that point in history hardly nations in the sense of western European monarchies like France, Spain and England. The Germanic lands were a hotch-potch of small states and dukedoms, united by language and culture but by little else. The mindset was different. 'Small was beautiful'. People thought regionally, not nationally.

So the southern wing of the Anabaptists, known today as Swiss Brethren, naturally focussed on their immediate area. On that basis, they did pursue unity and organisation. Leaders of local groups met at Schleitheim (or Schlatt am Randen) in Swabia in 1527 and thrashed through what they really believed and wanted. The result was the Schleitheim Confession, which became the seven-point manifesto and statement of faith for that part of the Radical Reformation. The very wording of the text speaks of united, organised purpose.

"The articles which we discussed and on which we were of one mind are these:
Baptism;
The Ban (Excommunication);
Breaking of Bread;
Separation from Abomination;
Pastors in the Church;
The Sword;
The Oath."

Here is evidence that there was unity and organisation in all three of Goertz's stated areas: leadership, practice and theology. The fact that it was not national, but only regional, is simply down to the political map of the time. All of which leads me to an initial verdict that the Radical Reformation (or at least this part of it) was indeed "radical".