The Zwickau Prophets

Müntzer and the Zwickau prophets…claimed that the Holy Spirit spoke to them with direct and infallible revelation.  The message they received from the Spirit trumped not only the church but the Bible itself.

“The Bible means nothing.  It is Bible – Booble – Babel.”

The Reformation as Renewal: Retrieving the One, Holy, Catholic, and Apostolic Church, by Matthew Barrett

Each must hear the voice of God, and go from there.  Müntzer’s reading of the first and second centuries of the church led him to the conclusion that the church had lost its way from the beginning: 1500 years of darkness.  The last days had arrived, and it was left to Müntzer to bring judgement.

Luther’s justification was a cheap grace, with no power to produce change.  Müntzer was to rally God’s elect, and then wipe out all of the non-elect.  A religious cleansing, a holy genocide.  He not only possessed the Spirit, but the Spirit told him to pick up the sword.  By this, he was saving the true church. 

Like Moses and Joshua in the Old Testament, the Zwickau prophets had received a divine commission to conquer God’s enemies to eradicate idolatry from the land.

As God’s elect, Müntzer and his followers could not fail.  He would become pastor of a church in Allstedt, unbeknownst to Frederick.  Destruction would follow: images, shrines, and all the rest.  Churches and monasteries were destroyed.  Everyone in the way of this cleansing must be executed. 

Soon enough, Luther would call on the authorities to take action.  His was a call of humble obedience to Scripture, and not a radical appeal to some radical revelation from the Spirit.  Yet Müntzer was given the opportunity to preach a sermon to the brother of Frederick the Wise, Duke John, in the Allstedt castle.

The devil himself infiltrated the heart of the church; corruption had been in the church almost from the beginning.  Müntzer vowed to return to the primitive church, what he called “real, pure, Christianity, during the days of Jesus and the apostles.”

He turned to the book of Daniel and concluded that the Holy Spirit would reveal God’s will in the last days.

These were those last days, and the Spirit revealed all to Müntzer.  He was the one to interpret the revelations; he was appointed this task by God.  The elected officials listening to his sermon should not hesitate to sacrifice everything for the sake of Müntzer’s mission. 

Reinstate the commands of Moses who instructed God’s people to “Break down their alters, smash up their images and burn them up, that I not be angry with you.”

Luther detested Müntzer’s interpretation of history; he petitioned the authorities to act swiftly lest revolt erupted.  On what basis should the princes have listened to him?  These were Satan’s schemes; when the Word of God prevails, Satan attempts to crush this.  Luther saw through Müntzer’s cunning devices; he did not have the fruits of the Spirit: not love, patience, gentleness, kindness, and certainly not peace.

[Luther] said that by not resorting to force, “I have done more damage to the pope than a mighty king could do.”

Of course, the prime example of this was Jesus Himself, taking down an empire via peaceful means.  Now, this was written by Luther in 1524, just a year before he wrote to crush the peasants: “Stab, smite, slay.”  Peaceful means only stretched so far.

Preserving the peace and punishing evildoers were responsibilities Paul attributed to governing authorities.

Not long after Luther’s letter, the authorities planned to come down hard on Müntzer, but he got away.  His power would multiply, yet Luther was convinced that Müntzer would not succeed.

Luther would come to associate Karlstadt with this movement, despite Karlstadt’s denials.  Karlstadt did not believe bloodshed was the answer.  Yet, Karlstadt, too, was impatient with the speed of reform, with a desire to make reform mandatory.  He also overemphasized the Spirit.

Further, the subject of icons: for Karlstadt, a violation of the Ten Commandments; for Luther, a subject to be dealt with as the people’s hearts experienced true change.  Whether or not images remained was a trivial concern for Luther.  He would write:

“I have no sympathy with the iconoclasts.”

Luther would conclude that Karlstadt did embody the same spirit as Müntzer.  Karlstadt would eventually become one of Luther’s harshest critics.  In the same way, Conrad Grebel, one of Zwingli’s most zealous advocates, would turn on him and start the Anabaptist movement.

Zwingli would leave the question of images to the magistrates; Simon Stumpf said this was up to the Holy Spirit.  Judgement has already been given by the Spirit; Zwingli had no authority to reserve judgement to the magistrates.

From here, the idea of the free church was born – a church free from civil control and authority.  Further, the same issue of speed of reform was found – just as between Luther and Müntzer (and Karlstadt). 

How fast the church made changes needed to match the maturity of the people being changed; otherwise reform could only remain superficial, a reformation merely in externals.

Grebel grew increasingly frustrated with Zwingli – Zwingli had become a false prophet, now part of the problem, not part of the solution.  He was a sellout to his lords, the magistrates.  But it was the dissenters that would lose. 

None of their preachers were allowed to preach in Zurich without first receiving permission; if their infants were not baptized within eight days, they would be banished from the city.  These actions only inflamed their cause.  George Blaurock baptized Grebel, marking the first rebaptism.

We are familiar enough with the arguments both for and against infant baptism, and these arguments were made at the time; I will not detail these here.  Yet, unlike the consequences of this debate today, in the sixteenth century, rebaptism was a capital offense: it was a rebellion against both church and state.

Despite this, Anabaptism was contagious through many parts of Germany and Switzerland.  Some who were rebaptized took their zeal to an entirely higher level.  The Scriptures were interpreted in a completely literalistic fashion (by literalistic, in the simplest and most direct understanding of the words and their definitions).

Unless they became like children, they could not enter the kingdom; hence, they would talk and act like children.  The apostle Paul wrote that the letter kills, so they burned their copies of the Scriptures.  Others would so emphasize new revelation that they found sexual immorality and self-harming behavior to be justified: after all, acts of the flesh do not matter.

Here was the extreme, and what Rome would latch onto: each individual interpreting the Scripture as he wishes.  Without ecclesiastical and political governance, only chaos could ensue.

Grebel and Müntzer would come together, with two letters of agreement from the former to the latter.  The church had been corrupted from the beginning, but it is most perverse now.  The biggest blame lies with the Reformers, as they mixed the Scriptures with human traditions.

Yet, Grebel wondered, was Müntzer not radical enough?  After all, Müntzer was not as literal regarding Scriptural interpretation as Grebel and his followers were.  Only a direct recitation of Scripture was permitted; nothing more, nothing less.  However, he disagreed with Müntzer regarding the use of violence.

Conclusion

Death by drowning.  First came repeated official warnings; after this, imprisonment for Anabaptists who persisted.  In some cases, torture would follow.  Others were banished from Zurich.  Ultimately, Anabaptism was punishable by death.

Blaurock was beaten and tortured, but as he was not a citizen, he was released and banished.  He persisted in recruiting, and was burned at the stake in 1529 in Austrian Tyrol.

The first drowning, that of Felix Mantz, came in January 1527.  Mantz’s drowning was seen by Anabaptists as a martyrdom, a sign that they were the true church just as the earliest church also suffered martyrdom.

Epilogue

In this section, there are caricatures of Protestants as well as points with which some Protestants today will find sympathy. 

A caricature: that Protestants believe that the Church was lost for 1500 years.  Sympathy: keep the state out of the Church.

A reminder that simplistic narratives do not – cannot – convey the truth and evolution of history.