original signers of the well known confession of Dort drawn up by
their first confession as well as from the fact that the most notable defender of Christ's deity among the Mennonites against the Socinians was Hans de Ries (1553-1638) an elder of the Waterlandians. Jacques Outerman, an elder of the Flemish Mennonites in Haarlem, Holland, early in the seventeenth century was accused of unorthodox teaching on the divinity of Christ. Only recently these charges have been repeated by W. J. van Douwen and W. J. Kühler in whose opinion Outerman believed that Christ during his life on earth was a man only. This view of the said writers is evidently due to a misunderstanding. Outerman not only taught the pre-existence of Christ, but that He retained His divine nature in the Incarnation. That he was biblically orthodox on the point in question is fully evident from the confession which he, with nineteen other elders drew up, setting forth their faith in the deity of Christ. This confession bears the date of October 8, 1626. It is found in the Martyrs' Mirror. Pieter Grispeer one of the original signers of the well known confession of Dort drawn up by Adrian Cornells of the same city, (1632) was a co-labourer with Outerman in the Flemish Mennonite Church at Haarlem. Presumably Outerman had passed to his reward at the time when the confession of Dort was adopted.
The Swiss Brethren agreed with Menno Simons and his friends in their position on the divinity of Christ. The opinion advanced by a few writers that the Swiss, in the conference held at Strasburg in 1557 declared the question of the deity of Christ to be of secondary importance, is without any foundation whatever. Not the divinity of Christ but the well known peculiar doctrine on the incarnation of Christ as held by the Brethren of the lower countries, was discussed and declared non-essential by this conference. In 1592 representatives of the Swiss Brethren met again in Strasburg and confessed their steadfast faith in the deity of Christ.
The definition of their attitude on the point in question is set forth in An Answer of the Swiss Brethren, also named Upper Germans, to the Polish, Concerning the Point of the Incarnation and the Deity of Jesus Christ." The "Polish" are the Socinians of Poland (Unitarians). They are in this letter addressed as "dear men," and their opinion is
declared to be altogether unscriptural and unacceptable. The concluding sentences of this important document follow: "Passed at the general gathering of the elders and ministers from many countries, in the year 1592 at Strasburg .... From Rauf-bits own handwriting translated from the High German into the Low German." Rauf-bits, it may be interesting to notice, is none other than Rauf Bisch, one of the spokesmen of the Brethren in the great debate held at Frankenthal in the Palatinate in 1571.
The Hutterites also considered the divinity of Christ one of the most fundamental articles of faith. It is worthy of notice that the so-called Articles of the Moravian Anabaptists 1526) in which this doctrine is questioned, are of altogether doubtful origin. Apparently they were drawn up by Hubmaier to serve as sentences to be discussed in a debate with Hans Hut in 1526. Hubmaier seems to have alleged that these articles represented Hut's views, but this was denied by Hut himself, who complained bitterly that the denial of the divinity of Christ and of other scriptural doctrines had been unjustly laid to his charge in these articles. Originally there were 52 theses or articles, but in the versions that have been handed down to us, their number is far less. Hubmaier also has erroneously been charged with defending the views in question. Certain it is that no Anabaptist body would have subscribed to these articles. As a source for Anabaptist principles and doctrine they are of very small value.
Once more it was found necessary to excommunicate an elder for unorthodox teaching. Francis Reines Kuyper, one of Menno's fellow labourers, had advocated some deviating opinions at the time of the conference at Embden. He seems to have denied the doctrine of justification by faith. In 1549 he was excommunicated by Menno Simons, and in 1554 he reunited with the Roman Catholic Church.
XVI RECENT ACCUSATIONS AGAINST MENNO SIMONS
Various charges against Menno Simons, some of them of a most serious nature, have been advanced by his most recent biographer, K. Vos.
Menno, according to this author stated an untruth in the account of his conversion: He says, when he had lived about one year as a priest in Witmarsum, namely in 1532, the unscripturalness of infant baptism was first asserted in those parts of Friesland and he knew not who the men were who first advanced this teaching or whence they came, neither had he ever seen them. This is false, says Vos; Menno must have heard of Peter Woodsawer through the Philips brothers, even if he did not meet him personally. However Menno Simons does not here speak of the time when Peter Woodsawer went forth to teach and baptise. It was more than a year after the teaching of the unscripturalness of infant baptism was first advanced in or near Witmarsum that Peter Woodsawer appeared on the scene. We do not know who were the men (Melchiorites) that first spread this doctrine in those places, but on the other hand we do know that in many instances men who advanced new and forbidden doctrine purposely veiled their identity. There is no indication that Menno ever saw these men. To say that he here speaks an untruth is to make an assertion which is utterly incapable of proof.
In the preface to the second edition of the Foundation, Vos alleges further, Menno asserted that "the contents of the new book were the same as of the old, only a few typographical errors were corrected and a few passages made clearer in style, language or form, but nothing was changed from the first principles and contents.'' Here again, says Vos, Menno did not tell the truth. But a careful reading of Menno's statement leads to the result that he says expressly, he made many changes. "I have in some instances made additions, have cleared up what was obscure, corrected the mistakes, eliminated what was unnecessary," etc., in other words, he had rewritten the book. And in order that no one might mistake the revision of the book for the first edition he also changed the title and in the preface makes mention of the title under which the first edition was published. It is correct that Menno says, he made "no changes from the first principles and contents," but this statement is made in the same paragraph in which he alludes to the additions and eliminations in the revision. Vos says that in Menno's account of the debate with Martin Micron an untruth
is found but fails to say wherein the alleged untruth consists. Further this author on the authority of Martin Micron accuses Menno of saying an untruth twice in the course of this debate. Two times, so Micron contends, Menno denied a statement which he had previously made and hence he is guilty of untruthfulness. But the audience before which Menno made a denial of the alleged statements was practically the same before which he had made the first statements. It must be remembered that there were no impartial judges to preside at this debate and there was danger that one participant would quote the other in a way that he was convinced to have been misquoted and consequently he would deny the statement. This accusation against Menno is based wholly on the assertion of one of his bitterest opponents, who held that a Christian government was under duty to persecute Menno and his friends. That such accusations can not be uncritically accepted need not be said. Martin Bucer, the leading reformer of Strasburg, asserted that Hans Denck would not condemn the horrible fratricide committed by Thomas Schugger in St. Gall - a charge which is a blot not on Hans Denck's but on Martin Bucer's name.
It is unnecessary to say that Menno Simons denied this charge. He complains bitterly that Micron "has dishonestly adulterated, changed, mutilated and glaringly misinterpreted my words and testimony". "I hope that I should rather suffer to be put to death," he says, "before a wilful untruth, be it small or great, should pass over my lips". "That they have thus shamefully trampled upon me, is but little to me, for I am aware that honour is not due me, being born of Adam, etc. But that I should be a fickle liar, a falsifier and artful rogue as through the slanderous, untrue, rude and bitter spirit of envy I am depicted by our opponents, from this may the merciful Lord ever preserve me".
Vos refers to Samuel Cramer to substantiate his accusation concerning Menno's untruthfulness in his debate with Micron. We must remind him of the fact that Cramer held Menno to have been virtually a Unitarian, besides other unfounded opinions concerning Menno Simons. This question can not be settled by appeal to authority, it must stand on its own merits.
In his first books, this author says further, "Menno manifested himself as one who is clothed with authority, one who .... shall fulfil a principal part in the looked-for coming of the Lord. As one sent of God he provides his books with wishes of blessing which in the name of God and Christ shall fall to the believers' part through Menno." In vain do we look for evidence to substantiate these charges; our author brings a number of quotations which show that Menno believed the advent of Christ to be near, but contain no indication whatever of a thought that he should have any part to fulfil in its consummation. On the contrary, his writings contain numerous passages showing clearly that he believed it probable that he would not be among the living in the day of the Lord. He says in the first edition of the Foundation:
"And if I must give my blood for it, I shall not fare worse than did John at the hands of Herod. I do not consider my life better than did the dear fathers. Neither may they take anything except my mortal perishing body and flesh which, if I lived a thousand years, must once die."
This passage and many others of similar thought show the fallacy of the opinion in question. What this author says concerning Menno's wishes of blessing indicates that he his failed to gain the proper point of contact with Menno Simons.
"Although Menno," so we read again, "has not appropriated for himself some Old Testament name, as did so many of the Anabaptist leaders (Hofmann, Matthys and John of Leiden), he nevertheless has as high an opinion of his own importance as they had." Here again an assertion is advanced which is clearly erroneous. There is abundant evidence to show that Menno Simons did not ascribe to himself any authority except such as the Scriptures give a minister of the Gospel. Many quotations to that effect can be given from his writings. He says in the first edition of his Foundation:
"Therefore read these our writings which we have given out and prove them in all wisdom, not by general councils, not by long usages, not by imperial laws, not by papal decrees; let not your decisions be influenced by placards and threatened cruelty, but judge these things
alone by the Gospel and the example of the Lord Jesus Christ and his holy apostles by which indeed the doctrine and life of a Christian must be judged and measured; and if you do this, you will without doubt find our doctrine and life to conform to the same. And if in these our writings we should have humanly erred in anything, in such instance we shall be willingly corrected from the word of the Lord."
To support his supposition that Menno believed himself clothed with special divine authority this author quotes a passage from Menno which in part is based on I Cor. 6:3. "Know you not that we shall judge angels?" The passage is taken from Menno's Meditation on the Twenty-fifth Psalm, where it is found in connection with the verse: "Consider my enemies, for they are many and they hate me with cruel hatred." The passage is here given at length.
"When I was of the world, I spake and did as the world and the world hated me not. While I served the world, the world rewarded me. All men spake well of me even as their fathers did of the false prophets. But now that I love the world with a godly love, seek from my heart its salvation and blessing, admonish, instruct, and rebuke it with Your holy word and, point it to the crucified Christ Jesus, the world has become to me a grievous cross and a gall of bitterness. So great is its hatred that not only I myself but also all who show me love, mercy and favour must in some places look for imprisonment and death. O blessed Lord, I am considered, by them more unfavourable than a notorious thief and murderer.
Am I not as a lost sheep in the wilderness of this world, chased, pursued and sought to death by ravenous wolves? - My flesh had almost said, I am deceived, because I find the unrighteous and unconcerned living in great quietness and peace, in riches and prosperity, while the godly must endure so much hunger, thirst, persecution and affliction. Their habitation is insecure; with difficulty they earn their bread; they are accursed, defamed, persecuted and despised of all men; they are hated of all men as the filth of the world and as an abomination. O blessed Lord, mine enemies are many and great. I am considered their mortal enemy because I point out to them the way of righteousness. O Lord, I am not ashamed of my doctrine
before You and Your angels, much less before this rebellious world, for I know of a surety that I teach Your word. I have not taught anything but true repentance, dying to our sinful flesh and the new life which is of God. I have taught the true faith in You and in Your blessed Son, that it is to be working and powerful through love. I have taught Christ Jesus and Him crucified, very God and very man, etc., etc.
"If all the prophets, apostles and evangelists have not taught this with great clearness from the beginning, I shall willingly say that my shame and oppression is just. - Had I not the word of Christ, how gladly would I be taught it, for I seek it with fear and trembling; in this (namely in following the Word) I can not be deceived. I have by Your grace through Your holy Spirit believed and accepted Your holy truth as the sure word of Your good pleasure. It shall not deceive me in eternity. Let them write and call, twist and threaten, let them dispute and boast, destroy, persecute and kill, if they choose, still Your word shall triumph and the Lamb shall gain the victory. Yea, I am assured and certain that with this my doctrine which is Your word, in the day of the revelation of Christ, I shall judge not only the world but also the angels. And though I and my beloved brethren were totally extirpated and one and all taken from the earth, nevertheless Your word shall remain the eternal truth".
It should be observed that the quotation given by Vos begins in the middle of a sentence, leaving out the antecedent of the pronoun "this" in the first clause and obscuring the fact that Menno speaks here of the word of Christ. Had the last sentence been added in which Menno refers to the possible success of his enemies who sought to take his life, it would have been made clear that he did not pretend to know that he would live to see the advent of Christ, excluding the insinuation that he believed himself to be called to fulfil a principal part in that event. Vos refers to a quotation of the passage in question by Cardinal Hosius, as given by Brandt in his History of the Reformation. It must be said that Hosius' quotation is more impartial and more to the point than the one given by this author.
On the authority of the cited passage from the first epistle to the Corinthians Menno Simons gives repeatedly expression to the thought
that the true Christians will judge the world: the doctrine which they advocate will he the judge in so far as this doctrine is the word of Christ (John 12:48). In all probability he would have readily admitted that he could not explain whether the saints will have a personal part in the judgement of the world. It should be noticed that he speaks in the context of the terrible persecution and infamy to which he and his friends were subjected for the sake of God's word, and his point is that those who here suffer with Christ shall with Him reign and be glorified. This, to his mind, was the import of the cited verse from first Corinthians. The charge of K. Vos that Menno "announced himself as the judge in the judgement to come" is altogether baseless.
The second and last passage quoted by Vos to support his proposition that Menno had a high opinion of his own importance, as much so as the leaders of the Munsterites, follows.
I rejoice from my heart that such faithful men are found who are ready to seal the holy commandments and testimonies of the Lord by giving their possessions and their blood, although you Micron) upbraid me with this matter. Nor do I doubt that at the day of Christ they shall be a part of my crown."
Vos does not seem to be aware that here again Menno expresses himself in the language of Scripture. The apostle Paul repeatedly speaks of those who had been led to Christ by him as his crown. (Phil 4:11; 1 Thess. 2:19). It seems almost unbelievable that on the ground of these passages Menno is put in the same category as Jan Matthys and John of Leyden as concerns his own estimate of himself.
Menno Simons advocated the view that ministers of the Word should not be engaged for a stated income either from the state or from the congregation, nevertheless a few writers have supposed that he received a fixed salary. "Nature was in his instance stronger than doctrine," says K. Vos. This assertion is based on a statement found in one of Menno's letters. The letter was printed apparently for the first time in the folio edition of his works, 1681, or about one hundred twenty years after it was written. An older manuscript copy is not known. Clearly the text of this letter bears unmistakable signs of
faultiness and corruption. The passage on which the said assertion is based follows.
"It was not with the thought of burdening you that I have written in my last letter to my intimate brother concerning the sixty Thalers annually. I took the liberty of so writing, for I need it yearly. - If something be sent for my need, send it the first opportunity; for the slaughtering time is at hand and I have little wherewith to buy. O, brethren, pardon my writing; necessity compels me".
It is by no means certain that Menno wrote this appeal. However, assuming this to be the case, the above quotation would indicate that at least some of the brethren were informed that Menno needed sixty Thalers annually. Equally evident it is that there would have been no necessity for him to write as he did, had he received a salary of that amount a year. It need not be repeated here that Menno and the early Mennonite Church openly disapproved of fixed salaries for ministers. A few years after Menno's death Leonard Bouwens was disposed from the ministerial office on several charges, one of which was to the effect that he had accepted fifty Thalers for his service.
A false accusation against Menno and his friends is also the insinuation of Vos that they forbid to greet any one who was not of their own persuasion. Certainly this would be a characteristic of rank enthusiasm. There is absolutely no evidence for this assertion and there is abundant proof that it is unfounded. Menno writes on the passage II John 10, 11 "... neither greet him, for he who greets him is partaker of his evil deeds".
"If some would say, John has forbidden the common usage of greeting my answer is that before my God I can not understand that John said this in regard to the common custom of greeting, but he says: If some deceiver should come to us who has forsaken the doctrine of Christ, we should not receive such a one into our houses, lest he deceive us, and we should not greet him as a brother that we may not be partakers of his evil deeds. But not so with the worldly greeting. For if the worldly greeting had such inherent power that it caused me to be partaking of the transgression of those whom I greet, it must follow
that I must be partaker of adultery, uncleanness, drunkenness, avarice, idolatry and blood-shed of the world as often as I greet a worldly man according to the common custom, or if I answer to his greeting. O no! not this greeting, but the greeting or the kiss of peace indicates unity
K. Vos says: "Whenever Menno became involved in a dispute, he overwhelmed his opponent with abusive words, but as soon as the latter refused to yield, but held him down to the point, and as soon as Menno was forced to argumentation, our man stood embarrassed. So he showed himself against John a'Lasco, Martin Micron, Adam Pastor and Leonard Bouwens." Here again this author makes statements which can not be substantiated. Even his own contemporary accusers did not say that. Menno in his Brief and Clear Confession, of 1544, testifies that in the discussions held at Embden he "in love" conferred with John a'Lasco and his co-labourers and they permitted him to depart in peace. He addressed them in the said book in a strikingly amicable tone. What Vos says concerning Menno's harsh dealings with Adam Pastor and Leonard Bouwens is an assumption which is without any evidence whatsoever. The assertion that he used abusive speech against his opponents at Wismar, and stood embarrassed when they desired arguments is based on the clearly biased report of his opponent Micron.
It is true that in his writings Menno is sometimes over-severe in his arraignment of conditions in the state churches. On the other hand, a comparison with the leading state church reformers shows that on point of abusive speech far severer criticism is due to them than to Menno. John Calvin who was more moderate on the point in question than either Luther or Zwingli speaks of Menno Simons personally in almost unbelievably abusive terms. Never did Menno stoop down so low as to use such epithets, even not against the corrupt sects whom he denounced most severely.
Menno Simons' writings give unmistakable proof that he was an able defender of the principles and doctrines for which he and his friends stood. His defence of believers' baptism and of the voluntary principle excels the argumentation of his assailants on these points; it is second only to that of Hubmaier. None other but Martin Micron, his principal
antagonist, himself, in a letter to one of the reformers speaks of the great power exerted by Menno through his writings.
The strange assertion that Menno confessed himself to be a cowardly character is based on an evident misunderstanding of a passage found in his works. He does not say, as has been supposed, that he urged his own faint-heartedness as a reason against his ordination, but that he, in considering the call which he received, recognised "my small gift and the timidity of my flesh." A cowardly person would not have consented to become a leader of those who were put to death as fast as they could be apprehended.
XVII A LETTER OF MENNO SIMONS TO A TIMID BELIEVER
The following letter is addressed to Menno's wife's sister, Margaret Edes.
Most beloved sister, whom I sincerely love in Christ. From your dear husband's letter I understand that during all the winter you have been visited with sickness and affliction, which I very much regret to hear. But it is our daily prayer: "Holy Father, Your will be done," by which we commit our will to the will of the Father, to deal with us as is pleasing in His blessed sight. So bear your affliction with a willing heart, for this is His paternal good will concerning you and all to your own good, that you may from your heart turn from all perishable things and keep your eyes fixed upon the eternal, living God alone. Be of good cheer in Christ Jesus for after the winter comes the summer and after death life. O sister, rejoice that you are a true daughter of your beloved Father. Soon the inheritance of His glorious promise shall be due. Only a little while yet, says the word of the Lord, and He who is coming shall come and His great reward shall be with Him. May the almighty, merciful God and Lord, before whom you have bent your knees to his Honour, and whom in your weakness you have sought, grant you a resigned and patient heart, not unbearable pain, sweet refreshment, a gracious restoration or a godly dissolution, through Jesus Christ, for whom we all daily wait with you, beloved sister in Christ Jesus.
Secondly I understand that you are often troubled in conscience because you do not walk in such perfection as the Scriptures direct us, nor have done so in the past; on which account I write the following to my faithful sister as a brotherly consolation from the sure word and eternal truth of the Lord. As no one under the heavens has perfectly fulfilled the righteousness required of God, save Jesus Christ alone, therefore none, however god-fearing, righteous, holy and unblameable he may be, can come to God, obtain grace and be saved, than only (I say only) through the perfect righteousness, reconciliation and advocacy of Jesus Christ.
So be of good cheer, and be consoled in the Lord. You indeed can not expect greater or more perfect righteousness in yourself, than all the chosen of God from the beginning have had. In and by yourself you are a poor sinner, and by eternal righteousness banished from God, accursed and judged to eternal death; but in and through Christ you are justified, acceptable to God, in eternal grace, and made His daughter and child. In this all the saints have found consolation, they have trusted in Christ and ever considered their own righteousness as unclean, weak and imperfect. Alone in the name of Christ they have with a contrite heart approached the throne of grace and with firm confidence have prayed: O Father, forgive us our debts, as we forgive our debtors.
It is a very precious word which Paul speaks: "When we were yet without strength in due time Christ died for the ungodly," yea when we were yet ungodly; and thereby "God commends his love toward us." "For if, when we were enemies, we were reconciled to God by the death of his Son, much more, being reconciled, we shall be saved by his life." (Rom. 5:6-10).
Lo, my beloved child and sister in the Lord, this I write from the sure ground of eternal truth. I herewith pray you and desire that you commit yourself wholly and fully to Jesus Christ and His merits, believing and confessing that His precious blood alone is your cleansing, His righteousness your piety. His death your life and His resurrection your justification. For He is the forgiveness of all your sins. His bloody wounds are your justification, His invincible strength
the staff and consolation of your weakness, as we have in former days, according to our small gift often shown and admonished you from the Scriptures.
Yea, most beloved child and sister, so long as you find and feel in yourself such a spirit which has an earnest desire for the good and abhors what is evil, though the remnant of sin is not entirely dead in you, as all the saints have complained of from the beginning, you may be assured that you are a child of God and that you will inherit the kingdom of grace in eternal joy with all saints, as John says: "By this we know that we dwell in him and he in us, because he has given us his Spirit." (I John 4:13). I sincerely ask you that you may rightly accept this by faith, to the refreshment, strengthening and consolation of your distressed conscience and soul, and hold fast to it to the end.
I commend you, most beloved child and sister, to the faithful, merciful and gracious God, in Christ Jesus, now and forever; may He do with you and with all of us according to His blessed will; either in the flesh, yet to remain a little while with your beloved husband and children, or out of the flesh, to the honour of His name and in the eternal bliss of your soul. You before and we after, or we before and you afterward. Separation must come once. In the city of God, in the new Jerusalem we will wait for each other, there sing the Hallelujah before the throne of God and the Lamb and praise His name in perfect joy.
Your dear husband and children I commend to Him who has given them to you, and He shall do all well for them. The saving power of the most holy blood of Christ be with my most beloved child and sister, now and forever. Amen.
Menno Simons, who sincerely loves you in Christ.
XVIII MENNO IN WÜSTENFELDE. HIS DEATH. HIS PLACE IN THE HISTORY OF THE REFORMATION
Soon after Menno had left Wismar he seems to have settled in Wüstenfelde "the desert field") near Oldesloe in the county of Fresenburg between Hamburg and Lübeck in Holstein. It is not
definitely known just when he with his family first came to this place. Here the Brethren were protected by the nobleman Bartholomew von Ahlefeld. This man had been an officer in the Netherlandish army and witnessed their persecution and martyrdom in the Netherlands. They impressed him favourably as quiet useful people and he decided to permit them to settle on his estate called "the desert field." Despite the dangers to which he exposed himself by tolerating them, he remained their friend but, if taken to account by the higher authorities, he would probably not have admitted that he knew these people to be Anabaptists.
Says an old chronicler: "This nobleman privately gave them liberty to live on his estate and cared for them faithfully. At a time when he received orders from the king not to tolerate them, he sent a servant to them, in agreement with the order of the king, announcing to them that within a day they must depart or bide the consequences; but afterwards he sent a trusted servant to inform them of the cause for this order and advised them that the men should absent themselves for a week or two, or abide in their houses. In the meanwhile he succeeded in quieting this excitement through one of the courtiers. After this the exiles came from every side until there was a little congregation there that lived in comparative quiet."
Menno Simons seems to have obtained his livelihood at times through his own manual labours. Later he was to a greater extent directly occupied with the obligations of his calling. At Wismar he incurred a severe injury on one of his lower limbs of which he was never fully restored, hence he, in view of the prevailing persecution, in order not to expose himself to unnecessary danger, he signed some of his letters "The cripple, your brother." At Wüstenfelde the congregation consisted for the most part of exiles.
From 1546 to 1552 Menno Simons seems to have found it impossible to have any of his writings printed. In 1552 or toward the close of the preceding year) he succeeded in establishing a small printing outfit and consequently a considerable number of his books was published in this and the following years. Where he set up his press is not known, later it was located at Wüstenfelde. His printer was at one
time waylaid and arrested by a neighbouring nobleman, but his patron von Ahlefeld compelled the latter to release him. From here Menno travelled extensively; he is known to have visited in Friesland and other states in this period. Some of the older writers have opined that on one of his journeys the persecuting authorities succeeded to apprehend and arrest him, but evidently this is an error. One of the Frisian Mennonite writers, Peter Janz Twisck, gives us an account of the dangers which Menno encountered. He says:
"Menno Simons' daughter in our presence related the following incident: A man who attended the meetings of the Brethren agreed that he would betray him to the authorities for a certain sum of money. He pledged himself that he would deliver Menno into their hands or would forfeit his life. However, this he could not accomplish, for whenever he watched for him in the places where the meetings were to be held, Menno escaped through the providence of God. And at one time when this traitor, accompanied by an officer, undertook to find and apprehend him, Menno unexpectedly passed before them in a small boat on the canal, but the traitor kept silent until Menno had passed them some distance and had leaped ashore on the other side. Then the traitor said: 'Behold, the bird has escaped.' The officer was enraged and demanded why he did not speak in time, to which the traitor replied: 'I could not speak, for my tongue was bound.' The magistrates were angry and the betrayer had to give his head because he let Menno escape."
"From a reliable source I have heard that Menno at Eenighenburg, a village in North Holland, at one time went into a church after the priest had completed the services for that day, and with great boldness, readiness of speech and learning he conversed with him in Latin about various Papistic superstitions. The priest was greatly surprised and after he had resigned his office, he related at length his conversation with Menno. Menno often conversed with priests. A certain cloister he entered without disclosing his identity and spoke to the prior with great boldness, admonishing him earnestly and pointing out their great errors. Although a decree containing his name, description of his clothing, person, etc., was nailed to the
church doors, with the promise of hundred or a few hundred guilders to any one who would cause his arrest, yet God preserved him from all the designs and cunning devices of the persecutors."
The well-known story of Menno escaping arrest through a sort of half lie has proved to be a fable. It is as follows: Menno was fleeing for his life and was overtaken by catch-polls who halted the carriage in which he with others was travelling Upon their question, "Is Menno Simons in the carriage,?" he is said to have turned to his fellow travellers with the remark, "It is asked whether Menno Simons is in the coach," and receiving a negative reply, he said to his pursuers, "The friends say, no." This story is of late origin and is unhistorical. Not Menno but a minister named Hans Buscher effected his escape in this manner. Later the story was ascribed to Menno Simons.
The year 1557 brought bitter disappointment to Menno and his friends. Gillis of Aachen, having fallen into the hands of the Catholic authorities in the Netherlands, recanted his faith. In consequence he was beheaded and his body broken upon the wheel, at Antwerp, on May 10, 1557. Had he remained steadfast he would have been burned alive. Some of the older writers say he was visited by a minister of the Brethren after his recantation and upon confession was reinstated into the church. His last words, it is said, were, "It is too much to lose both body and soul." His death was not recorded by Van Braght in the Martyrs' Mirror.
The last years of Menno's life were saddened by the dissensions on the question of the ban, which led to a division. His wife and son - John - died before him while two daughters are known to have survived him. He died at Wüstenfelde in 1561, probably on January 31.
"His last exhortation," says a trustworthy writer "he gave on his death bed, while his end seemed near, an evidence of his unquenchable zeal. He, however, recovered and was better for several days; but on the day of the anniversary of his renunciation of the Roman Catholic Church he had a relapse, and on the day following, Friday January 31, 1561, in the sixty-sixth year of his life, he fell asleep in Jesus, and was buried in his own garden."
The exact place where his body was laid to rest is today unknown, the settlement or village of Wüstenfelde having been so completely destroyed in the Thirty Years War that no trace of it remained.
Thus the way-worn pilgrim was permitted to die in peace and enter into the joy of his Lord. His was a life of toil under the most adverse conditions, a life of persecution and suffering. He was in dead earnest to serve his God. The opposition and scorn of the world made no impression on him. It has been rightly said that he lived a martyr's life. That the truth of God, the Gospel of His Son Jesus Christ be accepted and carried out in life and practice, and that men be brought to a knowledge of evangelical truth was the concern of his life. A mere profession of Christianity and observation of outward forms without the regeneration of the heart and the pertinent fruits he heartily despised. State-made Christianity he considered a miserable counterfeit.
Menno Simons was not the founder of a church. He was not a reformer in the sense that, in his opinion, the church with which he identified himself was in need of a reformation. He was the most noteworthy religious leader of the Netherlands in the Reformation period. In a strict sense he represented only the Brethren in the Netherlands and North Germany, but the Swiss Brethren of the South as well as the Hutterites of Moravia differed from him on only a few points. His writings have been persistently ignored by church historians. They are an indispensable source of information concerning the principles, aims and life of one of the strongest religious parties of Reformation times. During his lifetime the Mennonites were practically the only non-Catholic church in the Netherlands. Says Professor De Hoop Scheffer: "The Reformation among the masses of the Dutch people was first of all wrought by the people called Anabaptists." Only after Menno's death was the Calvinist reformation introduced in Holland and later the church founded by Calvin was made the state church.
While in the affairs of the world Menno Simons was by no means as prominent as the reformers who represented the state-church Reformation, he was as an advocate of pure evangelical principles, more than the equal of these men. The principle that the Holy
Scriptures are the only valid foundation for the doctrine and practice of the church he upheld more consequentially and unswervingly than the leading reformers. He differed from them on the question of free will and predestination. The doctrines of baptismal regeneration and the remission of sins through the observance of the Lord's supper he opposed on the ground that they are antagonistic to the principle of justification by faith. At variance with all the leading reformers he understood the great missionary commission of the Lord to be valid for all time. He insisted on strict church discipline.
In contrast to Luther, Zwingli and Calvin, Menno Simons advocated the voluntary principle. He rejected the thought of a national church or state-church to which they adhered. Holland was the first country to accept the principle of liberty of conscience. Here the Mennonite element was stronger than in any other country, and Mennonite teaching on religious liberty had a wonderful victory. The very presence of the numerous Mennonites proved the correctness of their opinion that various creeds may exist side by side in a given land without endangering existing political conditions, that for prosperity the church is not dependent on the subsidy of the state, and that it is not the business of the state to decide questions of creed, much less to kill or persecute those who do not accept certain religious teachings. Against the protests of the Calvinistic state church theologians of Holland the government tolerated Mennonites and other dissenters. It will be remembered that in Holland the Pilgrim Fathers found an asylum before coming to America in 1620.
After Menno's death Dirk (or Theodor) Philips was the most influential minister among the Brethren in North Germany and the Netherlands. His Hand Book of the Christian Doctrine is, besides Menno Simons' writings, the most important doctrinal work of the Brethren in the North. This book was translated into French, German and English. Three German editions were printed in America. The first English edition appeared in 1910. Dirk Philips died in 1568.