Some Thoughts on Anabaptist Non-violence and the Inclusive Compassion of Christ


I am becoming more and more Anabaptist in my sense of non-violence and resistance to Empire.  The Anabaptist movement had an understanding of itself as rooted in Christ’s non-violence, holding a prophetic stance to all the structures and norms of culture.  I am preaching more often as a Christian Pacifist who sees the resurrection as the non-violent Christ raised up; as Rene Girard has it, the de-mythologizing of the "civilization of mimetic violence."  (Girard, Truth or Weak Faith. Dialogue about Christianity and Relativism) Our experience of the crucified one, the one victimized by the violence of Empire, and risen amongst us is itself a challenge to the proclamation of the victory of mimetic violence.  

The Anabaptists were those of the radical wing of the reformation who along with their belief in adult baptism, held that the Christian must stand against the violence of the “civil” order of Wester's followers, and resisted the governing structures of the place where they lived, often creating their own structures based upon the ways of Christ.

The Amish, Hutterites, Old Believers, Mennonites, and Apostolic Christian Church, to mention just some of the contemporary expressions of this movement, still resist the norms of surrounding cultures and follow the non-violent, communitarian path of Christ.  The history of Western Civilization, marked as it often has been by violence and hierarchical structure, is not one that Anabaptists see as their own.  They counter this view with their idea that the Christian community is established upon the compassionate and self-giving love of Christ.

There are theological and sociological problems with Anabaptist theology.  The line they draw between the community of faith and government, and their refusal to engage in dialogue outside the boundaries of their particular faith community have created problems within the Anabaptist movement.  But the strength of community and the clarity around issues of violence and non-violence are features that seem deeply congruent with the Gospel.


It is my contention that Western Civilization, as we now have it, must be radically challenged by the work of God's love in Christ.  The normative structures of our society do not carry the virtues of the Gospel, but rather are marked by the values of wealth and power.  Further, the destruction of local communities and their autonomy by  large transnational corporate structures runs counter to the immediacy of the Incarnation known in community.  The resulting dislocation and loss of bonds of compassion is a major problem.  The Anabaptist movement understood that a locally known but universally significant community of the resurrection was the most faithful expression of God's purpose. 
The problem with these localized cells of compassion is that they can become closed to the outside world, both intellectual and spiritually.  This representation of the Church can be understood as a closed community of the saved who withdraw from an evil world in order to make certain of their salvation.  Outside the specific community of the faithful, the world is filled with evil and corruption.  Nothing can be gained by listening to those of other faiths or denominations, and engagement with the world must be minimal.

Accepting the limitations of Anabaptist theology in this regard is not to say that only Anabaptists have these problems.  Calvin, Luther, Wesley and other reformers often made negative judgments regarding those of other faiths and theological views.  They and their movements often acted upon these judgments by destroying the other in religious wars, in heresy trials and executions.  The Anabaptists, for the most part, because of their Spirituality of Non-violence, did not slaughter those they regarded as outside the community of believers.  However, the very real lines drawn between the Inner world of the saved and the outer world of the damned, meant a rigid boundary and a lack of interest in any form of real dialogue with the “others.”


Theologically the idea of a “centre” that is sanctified and an outer world that is damned has and does pose real problems.  The idea that the natural world is corrupt, a sign of the Fall, has meant that the impulse to destroy and uproot human communities from the natural world has found support in Christian understandings.  The positive resistance to evil in the world inspired by the prophetic tradition within Christianity has too often taken the shape of denying goodness in the natural and human world.  It has meant a separation of human society from the natural world and from those other humans who are irredeemable because they are not “Christian” or not part of one’s particular strand of Christianity.  The prophetic resistance to evil—the “Sacred Discontent” with the world as it is—has given impetus to a deep and hopeful social criticism, but when dis-incarnated,
it has become a destructive force that counsels the destruction of all that is not directly from or of use to the community of the saved.  

Lynn White, in his ground breaking work on the Christian roots of the ecological crisis, named this “Sacred Discontent” as an “activist character” that understood the natural world as merely a resource for human exploitation.  (Lynn Townsend White, "The Historical Roots of Our Ecologic Crisis", Science: 1967)  He argued that the idea of the world as a mere resource for exploitation, having little intrinsic worth beyond its use for humans, was founded on the Christian Doctrine of the Fall.  This, coupled with the idea that humanity should have absolute dominion over the earth, created the possibility for a use of machinery and technology that could destroy that earth at such a rate as to endanger the eco-systems upon which human life depends.


The Anabaptist movement shares this theological assumption with nearly all of the Western Church:  creation has no worth beyond its use, and has no qualities of value other than as used by human beings.  However, it is not a view that is necessary to Christian Theology, and there are many theologians, Christian thinkers and Followers who have not shared these views.  From Jesus through Francis and Julian to Matthew Fox, the Christian view has also seen Creation as a “blessing and filled with Sacred presence.”  God is the very breath of Creation itself.  John Cobb and Charles Birch, for example, in their co-authored book of theology and biology The Liberation of Life, argued that God might be said to be “Life” with a capital “L,” as known in all creatures. (John Cobb and Charles Birch, The Liberation of Life; Cambridge: University Press, 1981), passim).


So much in the gospel speaks in resistance to "globalized" violence, whether against the natural or human world.   This can involve even the idea of exporting particular cultural forms like "liberal democracy"
or "the global Market Place" (rather than the more radical democracy of the gospel that calls for a refusal to privilege wealth or power).  Incarnation of the resurrection means local worlds of meaning where we encounter the risen Christ not in "general," but in particular faces and forms.  This implies that the “common good’ is the expression of a democratic culture that has concern for the well- being of both human and non-human parts of a particular community. The particular gives the universal, certainly, but in the inter-relating of particular Incarnations of the risen Christ within the whole cosmic dance of creation, always locally known (again, this is what Incarnation means).  The problem with my Anabaptist leanings is the way in which I can exclude certain members of the community where I reside by believing they are outside of God’s concern because they are not part of the community of the elect—the saved, the politically correct, or the “Human”.  The wideness of God’s love is narrowed by my own concern to be a part of an “in” group.

One of the mistakes I have made in my own thinking has been in my attempt to make universal things that are culturally, socially and ecologically specific to the community in which I live.  One of the ways I need to transcend my Anabaptist thinking is in extending the non-violent work of eco-justice in a way that does not globalize schemes for salvation that may make sense in one location and with one community but may not make sense in another.  Taking the Incarnation seriously means taking each particular human community, culture and even religion seriously, as perhaps providing an Incarnation of the risen Christ within its own experience.  To attempt to globalize my own understanding of salvation can easily be an expression of Imperial ambition and violence, left or right.  It is time we encountered the risen Christ in our places, these specific ones, this specific landscape.  Empire is equally the force of those combinations of modern theology, science, technology and politics that try to control all places from a single centre.  The prophetic tradition of my Anabaptist tendency must be critical of my tendencies to imagine my theology or my culture has the solution for all others.  Modesty about our thinking and our theology does not mean we do not think critically or share possible solutions to problems, but it does mean that we must be open to learn and change by learnings from other communities.  Christ wears the face of the other as well as the face that is familiar to us.  We must come home to our own inclusive communities, and encounter that particular stranger at our door as Christ raised up.


The sermons I have preached in the last four weeks have tried to approach some of the above in many different ways.  I have tried to suggest that bad theology that argues we are created “morally corrupt” in fact
leads to a corruption of our sense of self as capable of doing good.  I have suggested that when we know our own being, when we know know the mystery of who we are as a gift given, we are freed to offer ourselves as a gift to others.  I have suggested that the “centres’ we construct for ourselves often perish and leave us feeling there is no meaning.  The remedy, as I see it, is neither to deny the pain in losing these centres, nor to cling to their remains.  Rather, it is to live beyond these centres towards the hope of an all inclusive and compassionate God who offers yet more possible centres of meaning that do not exclude past centres, but include them into richer and deeper possibilities.  The harmony of harmonies that is the aim of God transcends but includes, is incarnate in all particulars, but is beyond all particularity.

My Anabaptist sentiments come at a time when I sense that more and more we are living in a culture that is attempting to destroy all local communities and all sense of human solidarity in a “global marketplace”.  Further, it is a time when so much of what we do is based upon an assumption that the natural world is merely a resource to be exploited. This has brought all of humanity to the brink of catastrophe.  I feel that the non-violence at the heart of Anabaptist theology and its “counter-cultural” views that are prophetic and yet seek the creation of a “counter-cultural” community based on “gospel” virtues are of critical importance in our time of “market driven” economics and ecological destruction.  Hope is found, I think, in a Gospel that has both the critical eye of this tradition and the inclusive heart of Christ.  We need a community of critical thinking and of compassionate hearts.  That is living in the Way that is truth and brings Life.

Daniel Bogert-O'Brien.

Sermon Notes
Minister's Page
Sermon Listings
Spiritual Resources
Home Page