Independent Baptist churches vs Anabaptists

[Anthony Pritchard]

Convention men (Southern) at the local level long used the title Dom. (Director of missions)
But recently the official title was changed to Ms. (Mission strategist)

Huh. Personally I don't think I'd care to be called Tony, Ms.

 

[JonC]

The same is true of Baptist churches today. Baptist denominations and independent Baptist congregations vary widely, and many of them hold very narrow doctrinal distinctives of their own. In the case of the Independent Baptists, those variations are precisely what makes them independent.

I agree. What I mean, though, is Baptists would consider Anabaptists to be Baptists because of what they believe while Anabaptists would not consider Baptists Anabaptists because of what they do not believe.

But I am taking traditional positions. All of that has changed today. We have had Baptists baptizing infants, have elder rule, and we have had Anabaptists involved in politics, holding offices.

Traditionally Baptists hold to Baptists distinctives that Anabaptists share. But Anabaptist belief included things like a type of separation that socially isolates, a strict view of male and female conduct within a congregation, a strict view of non-violence, non-participation in politics, not holding office or voting.

Traditionally Anabaptist theology was not as influenced by the Reformation whereas Baptist doctrine benefitted from both Anabaptist doctrine and the foctrine of the Reformers (at least to a greater degree).

But today those boundaries are certainly less defined.

 

[Anthony Pritchard]

I agree. What I mean, though, is Baptists would consider Anabaptists to be Baptists because of what they believe while Anabaptists would not consider Baptists Anabaptists because of what they do not believe.

But I am taking traditional positions. All of that has changed today. We have had Baptists baptizing infants, have elder rule, and we have had Anabaptists involved in politics, holding offices.

Traditionally Baptists hold to Baptists distinctives that Anabaptists share. But Anabaptist belief included things like a type of separation that socially isolates, a strict view of male and female conduct within a congregation, a strict view of non-violence, non-participation in politics, not holding office or voting.

Traditionally Anabaptist theology was not as influenced by the Reformation whereas Baptist doctrine benefitted from both Anabaptist doctrine and the foctrine of the Reformers (at least to a greater degree).

But today those boundaries are certainly less defined.

Agreed.

Anabaptists historically held positions Baptists never adopted, strict non‑violence, political non‑participation, rigid gender roles, and a level of social separation that today’s Baptists have never embraced. Most Baptists today vote, hold office, serve in the military, participate in civic life, affirm just war theory, and believe Christians may lawfully engage the state. The historic Anabaptist would not find these positions agreeable. But they agree on the foundational distinctives of the faith once delivered.

 

[Alan Dale Gross]

What is the basis for rejecting this link from some ifb churches to Anabaptists?

My best guess would be that the part of the word, "Ana", that carries with it the designation of churches that do not accept "alien immersion" might not be what they are willing to stand for or do. Accepting "alien immersion" would mean that any potential members that had been "baptized", in whatever way, for whatever reason, would be allowed to become a part of their fellowship in good standing. One example of how that is a major problem is that they would be saying they accept for members those who have been "baptized" as an infant because someone was thinking it had something to do with their salvation, or people who believe "baptism" has to do with being saved as an adult. THE ENTRANCE TO CHURCH MEMBERSHIP IS NO LONGER SAFEGUARDED and they could accept in all kinds of lost people rather than maintaining a Regenerate membership, as much as possible, following the New Testament models and pattern.

Is it confounding groups with one another that actually aren't connected?

Like begets like. When their beliefs are the same on believer's baptism, Eternal Security, and the Priesthood of the Believer, those three things take in and cover all the other Doctrines, so they would be the same thing.

There would be groups of Waldensian, or some called Anabaptist, and said to be Baptists that have all kinds of differences which just would have to be weeded out of any investigation into their differences and similarities, but Historically Waldensians, Anabaptists, and Baptists who all administered Baptist Baptism are the same.

All of these document statements are from A. Ypeij and I. J. Dermout, History of the Dutch Reformed Church, trans. Lucas King (Kingstone Press, 2025), pp. 95–96. Originally published as Geschiedenis der Nederlandsche Hervormde Kerk, 4 vols. (Breda: W. van Bergen en Comp., 1819–1827); published by Kingstone Press, 2025.

“Here in this country there were likewise scattered many Waldenses, who possessed clear insights into the truths of religion, and, distinguished by a godly conduct of life, might be called the salt of the earth. These upright Christians — out of whom the still-surviving Baptists in this land have arisen, as will be further related afterward — had no small influence upon the uneducated portion of the people, in promoting better religious ideas, which thus had to become more and more widespread, especially with regard to the public church-ceremonies.”

“From this historical report concerning the old Dutch Waldensians, as they already existed in the twelfth century, and concerning their doctrine, as it was then, and had remained through the following centuries, one sees how the old and later Dutch Baptists, whose existence and doctrine are generally known, resembled them in everything.” Ibid., 159.

“...and yet it is indubitable that the Dutch Waldensians always rejected infant baptism, and only administered baptism to adults. This is definitely asserted of the Dutch Waldensians by HIERONYMUS VERDUSSEN, (106) by the Abbot A CLUGNY, (107) and other Roman Catholic writers. Hence it is that they have been known in this country from ancient times more under the name of Anabaptists than under that of Waldensians. (108) Especially from consideration of this doctrine concerning Holy baptism, one can explain how natural it was that, when in the sixteenth century some Anabaptists started mutinying, this crime was imputed to all Anabaptists, and all who would rather be called Baptists thereafter, were nevertheless still marked by their enemies with the hateful name of Anabaptists.” Ibid., 159.

“We have now seen that the Baptists, who in earlier times were called Anabaptists, and in later times Mennonites, were the original Waldensians, who, in the history of the church, have since long always received such well-deserved tribute. Therefore the Baptists may be regarded as from ancient times the only religious fellowship that has existed from the times of the Apostles on, as a Christian society which has kept the evangelical religious doctrine pure through all ages. The never deformed internal and external condition of the fellowship of Baptists then serves as proof of that truth, disputed by the Roman church, that the reformation of religion, as it came about in the sixteenth century, was necessary, most necessary, and also for the refutation of the Roman Catholics’ erroneous concept that their church denomination is the oldest.” Ibid., 165.
____________________________

“Nor could the Waldenses be called 'Reformed'; because they had from the earliest times remained pure in doctrine and therefore did not need to be reformed.” Ibid., 277.
____________________________

“But also a large part of the Netherlanders who declared themselves for the reformation of the church consisted only of old Waldensians, who were then called Anabaptists, as we have already come to know them before, as those true, noble Christians who, through all centuries of our chronology, had preserved the doctrine of the Gospel intact.” Ibid., 285.


Quotes from Dutch Church Historians
Concerning Waldenses
A. Ypeij and I. J. Dermout, 1819-1827