ANABAPTIST
HISTORY (PAGE 2)
(Menno
took over part of the Dutch AnaBaptist, who believed the same.
Did he
conform to get a Church?) The German religious leader, Melchior Hoffman,
who made all types of crazy predictions, started this part of the
Dutch AnaBaptist Movement. See- (The Swiss AnaBaptist, page 30. This
group strongly rejected Menno’s theology.) Menno believed
that Christ body was totally celestial. See – Secret of Their
Strength, by Peter Hoover, Benchmark Press, Shippensburg, Penn.,
page 245. However, some how or another, Menno did believe that Christ
had a human nature, somehow, just not a human body. (See – Menno
Simmons, Life and Writings, page 58). Thus, Menno
Simons denied that Jesus Christ was ever flesh and blood! Menno also
believed that Divorce was permitted for Adultery. (See—Secret
of Their Strength, page 247). Menno Simons
taught a strict, rash, authoritarian way of Excommunication and Shunning,
on all that disagreed on anything with the Preacher, (See- Secret
of Their Strength, page 258-259). Menno Simons
taught a form of Baptismal Regeneration. That is, Baptism was the
final step for the forgiveness and remission of sins. After which,
Simons believed, comes the promise of Salvation, See –(Secret
of Their Strength, Page 101-102.) “Christian
Baptism is a seal of faith by which they receive remissions of sins”,
See—(Secret of Their Strength, page 106). “We preach
that remission of sins takes place in baptism, not on account of
the water of the rite performed, but because men receive the promise
of the Lord by faith and obediently follow His Word and will…..
The forgiveness of sins takes place during baptism according to the
holy writings. Baptism is the putting on of Christ….. (See – Secret
of Their Strength, page 114). Menno Simons
at one time stated, “After we have searched ever so diligently,
we shall find no other baptism but dipping in water, which is acceptable
to God and approved in his Word,” See--J.N.
Brown’s Religious Encyclopedia, page 797; (Also find this quote
in Baptist History, by Clover, page 333). NOTE – Modern Mennonites
do not like this translation, and instead translate this passage
as, Baptism In The Water, Instead Of Dipping In The Water! However,
they still leave –IN – the water! Issac Backus
in his Church history book, page 227, writes, “The Mennonites
also came from Germany, and are of like behaviour, but they are not
truly Baptist now. Their fathers were so in Luther’s day, until
confinement in prison brought them to pour water on the heads of
the subjects, instead of immersion; and what was done out of necessity
is now done of choice, as other corruptions are”. Menno Simons
also later it appears, approved of Baptism by pouring. See – (Secret
of Their Strength, page 126). This also
comes out in Menno’s book, Foundation, and his book, The true
Christian Faith, when Menno states, the act of Baptism is an easy
matter to submit to as, “having a handful of water applied”. (See – The
Complete Works of Menno Simons, pages 38, and 124). This is why
Menno’s followers, the modern Mennonites, never Baptize anyone,
according to the Bible, that is by Immersion. If there is no Immersion,
by proper Authority, there is never any Biblical Baptism! There had
been a few exceptions, for at least the first couple of centuries
(1500 & 1600’s), There were
some Mennonites who only Immersed. See—(Mennonites In Europe,
pages 228, 249, and page 277). Menno also
believed in a Universal Church, when he wrote, “Those who hear
and believe the Word of God are baptized into one body…. All
are baptized into one spiritual body of which Christ is the head—that
is, they are baptized into the Lord’s commune”. See – (Secret
of Their Strength, page 127). That is why the Mennonites, even today,
believe in the Catholic doctrine of a Universal Church. Menno Simons
also believed in the Sacraments. He wrote, “We believe and
confess that the night time meal is a holy sacramental sign, instituted
by the Lord himself in bread and wine and left to his disciples in
remembrance of Him”, See – (Secret of Their Strength,
page 137). Menno Simons further wrote, “The visible commune
must be sound in teaching and sacraments”. See – (Secret
of Their Strength, page 172). Menno Simons
also taught a works Salvation. He stated, “If we do not perform
the nighttime meal and baptism, or if we perform them differently
from what God has commanded, we have by our disobedience neither
covenant nor promise. Whosoever teaches you differently deceives
your soul”. See- (Secret of Their Strength, page 178). Menno
also wrote, “I tell you the truth, I would rather be cut into
pieces than to allow myself to be separated for a valid reason from
the Lord’s commune ….. Let everyone be careful to conduct
himself wisely before God and his commune so that he may never be
smitten with such a curse by Christ – so that he may never
be placed outside of the holy congregation by Christ and his commune.
All who are outside of Christ’s congregation must be in that
of Antichrist”. See – (Secret of Their Strength, page
180). Based on
Menno’s views, it is hard to see how Menno could have ever
been considered a Baptist, and his followers the Mennonites (a part
of the Dutch AnaBaptist), by the mid-sixteen hundreds, as ever being
considered true AnaBaptist, and thus no longer a true Church! According
to Mennonites in Europe, page 392 – A Mennonite Publication,
it is stated that the Swiss Brethren (AnaBaptist) were known as Taufer.
The German word Taufer means Baptizers or Baptist. The Dutch
word for Taufer is Doopers. Yet, the Mennonites still deny that historic
Baptist existed before them, and Immersed. What then, were the early
Christians, but Immersing AnaBaptist! The modern
Mennonites (since the mid-1600’s) came from a part of the Dutch
Anabaptist, and to be more exact, from Menno Simons. They cease to
be AnaBaptist, when they ceased to Immerse. The Baptist, coming out
of the AnaBaptist, continue to Immerse saved ones, into the local
Church, and thereby continue to be the true Church, through the succession
of AnaBaptist Churches. However, even today, many Baptist Churches,
like the Mennonite Churches in the 1600’s, are ceasing to continue
to be the Lord’s Churches, because they are no longer Baptizing
saved ones into the local Church! They have become Protestant Assemblies,
with a Baptist name. Is it wrong for Churches to once again use the
AnaBaptist name? Not, if their Authority comes through a historic
Baptist Church, and the change is done to separate them from all
the false Baptist Churches. Were the
AnaBaptist Arminian, as defined, since 1610 AD? ------- NO------!!!!!!!!!!! A brief
explanation is needed, as to why since 1610? Jacobus (James)
Arminius was born in 1560 AD. He became a reformed (Calvinist) Preacher
in 1589 in Amsterdam. In 1599 AD
he was asked to write a rebuttal to the Mennonites (not the AnaBaptist).
At this time he was a Dutch Seminary Professor. In 1605 he became
a Mennonite, and wrote not many subjects before his death in 1609
AD. In 1610, his followers, who are the present Mennonites, one year
after his death, presented a Remonstrance (a protest) to the State
of Holland. Arminius followers, who became known as Arminians, demanded
that the doctrinal position of the Churches of Holland, be changed
with five major points of change. 1. Man is
so depraved that divine grace is necessary unto faith or any good
deed. This point is called Total Depravity, as compared to Calvin’s
Total Inability. This was James Arminius position, and he never changed
on it. However, Arminians, and latter Wesleyans, changed this point
to partial depravity. Man is born innocent, but will sin, because
of the influences of the world around him. Man under partial depravity
can respond to God on his own, if man chooses. In reading the writings
of James Arminius himself, it is very clear that Arminius believed
man could only come to God, by God enabling man’s will, to
respond to God. Without the intervention of God, all men would go
to Hell, and none could even make a chose for God! James Arminius
held to the AnaBaptist position, and true Baptist Churches today! 2.God elects
or reproves on the bases of foreseen faith or unbelief. 3. Christ
died for all men and for every man, although only believers are saved. 4. This grace
may be resisted. 5. James
Arminius taught that all who are regenerated by the Spirit of God
are eternally secure and can never perish. However, in the Remonstrance,
it is stated like this, “Whether all who are truly regenerated
will certainly persevere in the faith is a point which needs further
investigation. See— (Arminianism, by Roger Nicole, Baker’s
Dictionary of Theology, page 64). This led to Arminians teaching
that one, who is saved, could lose their salvation. This led to works
salvation. This is seen in the modern Wesleyan Church, Nazarene Church,
Holiness Church, Freewill Churches, and Mennonite Churches, just
to name a few. This view follows Minno Simon’s position, and
not James Arminius. In 1619,
the Protestant Synod of Dort rejected Arminianism, and affirmed Calvinism.
They placed Calvinism into 5 points, using four Chapters, See – (Calvinism
by Ben A Warburton, page 61) also See – (The Five Points of
Calvinism, by David Steele and Curtis Thomas, pages 13 – 23).
This book is a strong Calvinistic book. For those
who deny that the views of James Arminius have been altered, to fit
Menno Simons views, the five points of James Arminius are restated
again, taken from his own writing (original source). 1) Depravity
is a state, which leaves the reasoning of man responsible for his
own destiny through choosing faith or unbelief. Arminius believed
God enabled man to be able to choose. Whereas Augustine placed all
babies who die in Hell, Calvin placing all non-elect babies in Hell,
Arminius placed all dead babies in Heaven. Arminius believed that
inherit sin, (From Adam) caused only physical death. However, acquired
sin, when one is old enough to reason, sends all to Hell, without
the New Birth. That why Christians, with the New birth, cannot escape
the penalty of physical death, because of inherit sin. 2) Election
or predestination is conditional, based upon God’s foreknowledge
and not arbitrary degree. 3) The atonement
of Christ is for all, not just for the elect, even though some reject
it and therefore fail to receive the benefit 4) God’s
grace is not irresistible, but can be rejected by man in his free
choose. 5) “But
at no period have I asserted, that believers do finally decline or
fall away from Faith or Salvation”. See – (Arminius,
volume 1, page 741) “Faith
(Saving Faith) is peculiar to the elect (Saved Ones) and believers
(Saved ones) do not finally fall away from the faith. In like matter,
faith (Non-saving faith) is not particular to the elect, and some
believers (lost ones) finally decline from the faith”. See – (Arminius
Volume I, page 742) In point
five, Arminius is giving room for the Religious lost. Can anyone
deny that there are some who say they are saved, who will end up
in Hell? Menno Simmons
contested Luther’s Faith Only Doctrine when he said, “Thus;
they maintain this doctrine as firmly as though works were not at
all necessary”. Clement,
an early church father writes, “God does not crown those who
abstain from wickedness by compulsion, but those who abstain by choice”. Justin Martyr
writes, “Though we have no choice in our creation, yet in our
regeneration we have; for God persuades only, and draws us gently
in our regeneration by co-operating with those rational powers He
has bestowed upon us”. See -- Heartbeat
of the Remnant, March 2000, pages 16-19) Joshua Thomas
who died in 1797, wrote the History of the Welch Baptist from 1633 –1770AD,
on page 45 he wrote, “Divided
unbelievers into the following classes: Atheists, Deists, Jews, Socinians,
down-right Arminians, the Openly Profane and Backsliders. The unbeliever’s
duty was to come to Faith and Repentance”. Because of
Menno Simon’s views, look what happened to the Mennonites? Mennonite
publishing committee in 1919, wrote— 2) That God
will not bestow his saving grace upon the sinner without repentance,
submission, and obedience on his part (works). 3) Evil works
will undermine a saving faith and rob the individual of salvation.
God will remove his saving grace from such as do not continue to
bear fruits of submission and obedience. 4) Restitution
is an indispensable condition without which the grace of God will
not operate. NOTE – The
danger or perhaps even the tendency of modern Arminians to fall into
legalism or Pharisaism is very real! Not to leave
the dangers of Calvinism out here, Augustine wrote, “Why is
it wrong to kill a man, who was going to die anyway, if it is for
the greater good of mankind? – This leads to -- Mercy killing?
Abortion? Killing the terminally ill? Killing the lame, the retarded,
even the elderly? There being
no evidence of Modern Arminism, among the AnaBaptist, before Menno
Simons, was there evidence of Arminism among Catholicism? In 400AD,
a British monk and Catholic theologian came to Rome, by the name
of Pelagius. Pelagius lived from 360AD until 420AD. He was banished
by the Catholic Church in 418AD, because of his views. He taught
the following: 1. That the
human will has a place in the process of Salvation. 2. That each
man is created free as Adam was. That each man has the power to choose
good or evil. That each soul is a separate creation of God. Therefore,
each soul is uncontaminated by the sin of Adam. 3. That the
universality of sin is the weakness of human flesh, rather than by
the corruption of the human will by original sin. Further,
that man does not inherit original sin. 4. That sins
are committed unless the individual wills to cooperate with God in
the process of Salvation. 5. That the
Human will is free to cooperate with God in the attainment of holiness
and can make use of such aids to grace, as the Bible, reason, and
the example of Christ. At this same
time in Church history, a man was living who name was Augustine.
He is considered by many as the father of Catholic Theology. He lived
from 354AD until 430AD. Today, we talk about a person being a Calvinist
or not. In actuality, one is either an Augustinist, or not. This
is because all five points of Calvin are found in Augustine, eleven
hundred years before Calvin. Augustine taught some of the following
things: 1. That regeneration
is exclusively the work of the Holy Spirit. 2. That man’s
will is entirely corrupted by the fall, so that he is unable to exercise
his will in regard to the matter of Salvation. 3. That Salvation
can come only to the elect. 4. That God
must energize the human will to accept His preoffered grace, which
is only for those whom He has elected to Salvation. Shortly after
Augustine died, the Catholic Counsel at Ephesus condemned Pelagius
views, in 431 AD. However, neither the Eastern nor the Western Catholic
Churches, ever fully accepted Augustine’s views on everything. This led
to a Century later, for a Catholic monk, John Cassianus, to try to
find a compromise position by which the human and Divine will, could
cooperate in Salvation. John Cassianus taught the following: That all
men are sinful because of the fall, but their wills were only sickened,
and not totally corrupted. Cassianus feared that the doctrines of
election and irresistible grace taught by Augustine, might lead to
ethical irresponsibility. In the final
conclusion, the views of Cassianus were condemned at the Synod of
Orange in 1529AD, in favor of a moderate Augustinian view. See—(Christianity
Through the Centuries, by Earle Cairns, pages 148-149 & 157). It is important
to note that the views of the Medieval Church on this point were
similar to those of the Semi-Pelagians, who followed John Cassianus. With this
background, one wonders how Menno Simons, a former Catholic Priest,
ever took free will so far, that one could lose their Salvation,
having been transformed by the power of God, into a new Creation? Were the
AnaBaptist Theological Calvinist (Augustinist)? To begin
with, we need to go back to the start of Calvinism, Augustinism.
It might surprise many Calvinist, that Augustine was not original,
in the doctrines, which would make him famous. In Athens,
Greece, over seven hundred years before Augustine, lived a man by
the name of Zeno. He was the founder of the celebrated school of
the Stoicks. He lived from 362BC until 264BC. He taught the predestination
or fatality of all things. The Stoicks embraced the doctrine of the
predestination of all things. This doctrine stayed with them for
hundreds of years. When Paul
was teaching at Athens, Greece, the Stoicks and the Epicureans encountered
Paul and disputed with him. They stated
that he had set forth strange gods, and a new doctrine. (Acts 17:16-21).
Was Paul the first Preacher to preach against Calvinism? According
to the Stoicks, every event is determined by fate. The sentence already
fixed, predestinated by the gods. The Jewish
Pharisees also believed in the absolute predestination of all things.
See – Josephus History book 2, chapter 8, section 14, as well
as Mosheim’s History, page 164. This might account for the
Pharisees attitude towards Jesus in Mark 8:24-41. Catholic continued
the doctrine of predestination, through Augustine in the 300’s
AD. Protestants
adopted and slightly modified the doctrine of predestination of all
things by John Calvin in the 1500’s AD. The main
difference being that Augustine placed all dead babies in Hell, and
Calvin only placed non-elect babies in Hell. Mosheim states
that all the fathers before Augustine taught a conditional election,
and that Augustine himself, in his early ministry, taught a conditional
election. But, in the year 397AD, Augustine discovered the doctrine
of absolute predestination. Augustine
was a bitter enemy of the Donatist Churches, which held to the doctrines
of the Novations. The Novations taught a conditional election, and
were strongly opposed to unconditional election! Historically,
the AnaBaptist were opposed to: 1. Total
Inability. Not total depravity, which has God enabling man. 2. Unconditional
Election 3. Limit
Atonement 4. And Irresistible
Grace They did
believe strongly in Eternal Security, this is different from Perseverance
of the Saints. See – (Election
Made Plain, by L.S. Ballard and Ernest Rippetoe, now published by
Halls Baptist Church, Halls Tenn., this was an old out of print work)
Call – (865) 922-2912, to obtain a copy. Calvinism
as crept into the Baptist Church from English Baptist, who were exposed
to Protestantism. It has also come into the Baptist Churches from
the great Revivals of George Whitfield, who filled the Baptist Churches
with Calvinist in the 1700’s. Another great problem is that
most Scholarship on Bible Studies has been written by Calvinist.
The printed page has ruined many a Baptist Preacher. Baptist as a
whole, have been poor on writing Theological Works. This is sadly
very true! This last
section will make many Baptist mad. However, are you a Cultural Baptist,
or a Bible Baptist? Teachings
of the AnaBaptist neglected or rejected today, by most Baptist Churches! The practice
of Feetwashing – As the First Part of the Lord’s Supper
(See John 13 and I Timothy 5:10) According
to John Christian in, “A History of the Baptist Church” Volume
1, page 328, in reference to the 1600’s states, “For
a period the imposition of hands upon the Baptized, fasting as a
religious duty, washing the feet of the disciples, and anointing
of the sick were practiced in some congregations”. Paul in I
Timothy 5:10, refers to feet washing in the Apostolic Church, based
on John 13, as commanded by Jesus. Tertullian
who lived from 160-220 AD, makes mention of feetwashing as an observance
in the Church. Ambrose who
lived from 340-397 AD, Augustine who lived from 354-430 AD, and others
of the Church Fathers defended it In the Synod
of Toledo, in Spain, held in 694 AD, the assembled bishops decided
that only those who participated in feet washing should be permitted
to take the Lord’s Supper. Bernard of Clairvaux who lived from
1113 –1153 AD, defended feet washing as a Divine Commandment.
Luther in his Greater Catechism favorably mentions feet washing as
an observance. Casper Schwenckfeld
who lived from 1490 –1561 AD, taught that feet washing is a
command of Christ, as well as Baptism and the Lord’s Supper. The AnaBaptist
in 1525 AD practiced it in the congregation of Balthasar Hubmaier
at Waldshut, in South Germany. The chronicler
Sebastian Frank wrote in 1531 that feet washing was practiced by
some of the Swiss AnaBaptist, and Heinrich Bullinger, in his large
work against the Swiss Brethren (AnaBaptist) in 1560, confirms feet
washing among the AnaBaptist. The AnaBaptist
in central Germany also practiced feet washing. Pilgram Marpeck,
who labored at Strasburg, Augsburg and other places of South Germany,
makes repeated mention of feet washing, in the Churches. The Ausbund,
the hymnbook of the early Swiss Brethren (AnaBaptist), contains two
hymns teaching the washing of the Saints feet. The Dortrecht
Confession of Faith of 1632 teaches feet washing, as well as the
writings of Dirck Phillips. (Feetwashing
quotes from MIE, pages 357-358). Today, the
Dutch River Association of Baptist, General Baptist, Primitive Baptist,
Separate Baptist, United Baptist, Regular Baptist, and true AnaBaptist
Churches all still practice feet washing. Also, the
quote from Clover’s Baptist History, page 341, is very interesting. “The
student of church history will perhaps be surprised to learn that
many good, and otherwise sound, Baptists have believed and practiced
foot washing.” Note – Clover puts this quote in his book,
though he himself does not believe in feet washing! The practice
of Nonresistance (See—Matthew 5:38-48; Romans 12:14; 2 Corinthians
10:3-5; John 18:36; Ephesians 6:12; and Hebrews 7:12 etc.) – Also
discussed favorably in Clover’s Baptist History Book “The
AnaBaptist did not use the negative term nonresistance. They spoke
only of Wehrlosigkeith (being without defense), AnaBaptist …… believed
that the sword was for the world and the Word of God for the Church.
See—(Secret of Their Strength, page 210). The Baptist
were peace lovers and did not believe in the use of the sword. This
trait would probably describe most of them. They were reviled and
they reviled not again, they were persecuted and they pleaded for
liberty of all. The entire Christian world was engaged in persecution.
The Baptist, in all lands, both Protestant and Roman Catholic, were
cruelly persecuted by imprisonment, exile, torture, fire, and sword.
The Baptist by thousands were martyred. They alone pleaded for liberty”.
See – (A history of the Baptist, by Christian, page 99-101). Felix Manz
said, “No Christian smites with the sword nor resists evil”.
See – (MIE, page 359) Adrian Cornelis
who was executed in 1551 AD wrote, “Woe is you who shed the
innocent blood of those who have no desire to defend themselves with
material or carnal weapons, but only with God’s Word. This
is our sword, and it is two-edged and sharp”. Conrad Grebel
in 1524 wrote, “The Gospel and those who accept it are not
protected with the sword, neither should they thus protect themselves ….True
believing Christians are as sheep in the midst of wolves … They
must be baptized in anxiety and trouble, tribulation, persecution,
suffering, and death. They must be tried in the fire and must reach
the Fatherland of eternal rest, not by overcoming bodily enemies
with the sword, but by overcoming spiritual foes. They use neither
the worldly sword, nor engage in war, since among them, taking human
life has ceased entirely, for we are no longer under the Old Covenant”. Hans Schlaffer
who suffered martyrdom on February 4th, 1528 wrote, “Our faith,
life, and Baptism is founded on nothing else than the commandment
of Christ, and all the days of my life has no uproar or sedition
come into my heart ….. There is no plot or other intention
among us except to amend our lives, and to abstain from the vicious,
unrighteous life of the world”. The Swiss
Brethren (AnaBaptist) wrote in 1532, “In Matthew, chapter 5,
Christ forbids the believers all use of force. He says that rather
than go to law they should permit others to defraud them, they should
not strive with any one and should give the cloak to him who takes
away their coat. The civil government was ordained of God to punish
the evildoers and protect the good …. We believe the civil
government should be separate from the church ….. And not be
established in it”. In Moravia,
in the year 1579, for the first time, a sum of money was demanded
from the Hutterian Brethren as a war tax. In accord
with their principle of nonresistance and their confession of Faith,
which forbids paying war taxes, they refuse to give it. The authorities
in consequence seized part of their property, and continued to, for
many years, at one point becoming annually. See – (MIE, page
362) Wilhelm Hadorn
and other impartial writers have pointed out that the Swiss AnaBaptist
always consistently adhered to the principle of nonresistance. See—(MIE,
page 365) The fact
deserves notice that not only the followers of Hubmaier but all AnaBaptist
who did not teach the principle of nonresistance, had a very brief
history. Few of them indicated a willingness to endure persecution.
See – (MIE, page 365) NOTE – The
last person executed for heresy in England, was by being burned alive.
This took place at Litchfield, England April 11th, 1612 AD. At this
time, Edward Whitman, a Baptist, was burnt alive. See – (The
World’s Debt to the Baptist, by John Porter, page 16). Head Coverings
on Ladies Very few
Baptist Churches still believe in Head Coverings on Ladies (I Corinthians
11), and these Baptist Churches are mainly Calvinistic. Any honest
Bible student will admit there are two coverings in I Corinthians
eleven. The long hair cannot be the covering; women are to put on
their heads. Besides, there are two different words for coverings
in the Greek for this passage. (Unless you believe Paul wrote and
spoke in 1611 English). There are 4 articles listed at Anabap.com,
under tracts, for further study on this topic. The reason that Preachers
won’t speak out for the woman’s head covering has to
do with popularity, not with the Bible. How about feet washing, the
Holy Kiss, (commanded 5 times in the New Testament)? Just how much,
has our culture taken us away from the Word of God? Marriage AnaBaptist
also refused to have their marriage ceremonies performed by the officials
of the State Church, and this caused many people to believe that
they were not married and were guilty of immorality. They felt that
their lifetime pledge to each other, witnessed by a preacher of the
Gospel and local witnesses, constituted a Biblical Marriage. See – (Faithful
Baptist Witness, by Stringer, page 203). Note—All that a State
Marriage, as compared to a Coveture Marriage does, is give you the
opportunity to get a DIVORCE! Easy Beliefism Pilgram Marpeck
in his writings, who labored in Strasburg, Augsburg, and other places
of South Germany, spoke disapprovingly of preaching justification
by faith without giving repentance and conversion their proper emphasis.
He also declared that taking Oaths and defense by force were forbidden
the Christian. See- (MIE, page 360) Non-conformity
To The World Bullinger
in his first book against the Swiss AnaBaptist writes in 1531, “they
disapprove of dancing, and all other forms of worldly amusement.
They insist on modest apparel, and condemn outward adorement.” Bullinger
in his second book written in 1561 writes, “they reject wearing
costly clothing and ornaments”. Franck in
1531 AD wrote, “The AnaBaptist believe in simplicity of clothing”. Capito wrote
concerning the Swiss AnaBaptist, “They are determined to shun
the evil life of the world”. A Good Quote – “Worldliness
manifested itself in the endeavor to avoid unpopularity”. See—(MIE,
page 255)
<<<PREVIOUS PAGE TOP
OF PAGE
|