What hath Grand Rapids to do with Goshen? John Howard Yoder and the Reformed-Anabaptist Dialogue

I come from within the Reformed tradition, and yet I write about John Howard Yoder, the most noted Anabaptist theologian of the last century (and perhaps of all time). What gives? Am I betraying the Reformed faith in advocating for many of Yoder's ideas? Isn't a Reformed position on numerous theological and ethical issues directly contrary to Anabaptism, and vice versa? In an article originally published in The Journal of Religious Ethics in 1989 entitled "Evangelical Ethics and the Reformed-Anabaptist Dialogue," Yoder and Richard Mouw highlight four commonalities between the Reformed and Anabaptist traditions. In that article, they argue that the differences between Reformed and Anabaptist positions are in fact "intra-family" debates. What follows is my summary and gloss on the points made by Mouw and Yoder.

1. Scripture as the starting point for moral reflection

Both Reformed and Anabaptist communities affirm that sin has greatly affected our ability to know and do what is good. For example, the Canons of Dort state that whatever light remains in humanity after the fall is suppressed and distorted. It's not just that we can't truly know God in our sinful state; we do not use the "light of nature" correctly "even in matters of nature and society." (Canons of Dort 3/4, art. 4) Reformed thinkers, however, often soften this blow with appeals to common grace, conscience, or the cultural mandate. Anabaptists are generally less likely to soften this blow, affirming a strong church-world distinction that highlights the need for special revelation in all matters. The line between Reformed and Anabaptist here, however, is not a hard and fast one. 

2. A strong volitional element

The term "volitional" means a focus on the will. In other words, both Reformed and Anabaptist traditions focus on the need to repent, turn from sin and turn to God in faith. Surrender is therefore crucial to the Christian life. This second commonality is also connected to the first, in that both Reformed and Anabaptist focus on the primacy of Scripture as moral authority. That is, our wills and consciences are subject not to human reason or to our "natural desires," but to Scripture. 

3. The relationship between Old and New Testaments

It might sound strange to say, but the Reformed view of infant baptism made much more sense to me after I had read Yoder (Yoder might be aghast to hear this). Why? As Mouw and Yoder point out, both Reformed and Anabaptist traditions see the Old Testament as "promise" and New Testament as "fulfillment." For both, there is continuity between the Testaments and an emphasis on the one coherent narrative of Scripture. Yoder incessantly emphasized the Jewishness of Jesus and the fact that you cannot understand Jesus without understanding the Old Testament (Sidenote: it might be a worthwhile question to think about to what extent the European Reformed biblical exegetes that Yoder drew from framed his view of the continuity between Old and New Testaments. I don't presume to answer that question one way or the other, but simply flag it.) Yoder underscores continuity in this way: "What Paul sees happening in Christ and in the Christian Church, like what Jesus had said in Matthew, is the fulfillment and not the abolition of the meaning of Torah as a covenant of grace" (Jewish-Christian Schism Revisited, p. 95). Seeing Scripture as one unfolding covenant of grace--this is language that resonates strongly with Reformed theology and piety. It also connects to Calvin's third use of the law. For Calvin, the law does not simply serve a civil function (to restrain sin) and a pedagogical/elenctic/accusatory function (making us realize how sinful we really are), but it serves to give actual guidance to the Christian community today. Calvin doesn't presume all of the law does this, but he does argue that significant portions of the Old Testament (for example, the Ten Commandments) are not simply to be discarded. In fact, the Heidelberg Catechism uses the pattern of Jesus' Sermon on the Mount to explain the meaning of the Ten Commandments; the focus is not simply on the letter of the law but on the deep meaning of each command that calls us to truly love God with all our heart, soul, mind, and strength, and our neighbor as ourselves. Both Anabaptists and Reformed folks emphasize that the law is itself grace, for being conformed to the image of Jesus Christ is our calling and destiny. This is not works righteousness or legalism, but a realization that true freedom comes only in living in line with God's will for human life. (Another sidenote: for a great explanation of Yoder's reading of the Old Testament and the overall storyline of Scripture, see John Nugent's The Politics of Yahweh.

4. Connection between personal piety and corporate/communal commitments

Anabaptists and believers churches focus on the voluntary nature of church membership. There is no such thing as a nominal or non-committed Christian. For Reformed churches, a central mark of the church is discipline. Although people often equate this with a punitive approach to church discipline, the central point is that the church is a community of accountability. If there is no discipline, in the sense of ongoing sanctification and obedience to Scripture, then there is no proper church (this raises the question of whether there can be such a thing as a Reformed or Anabaptist mega-church, but that's a topic for another blog entry). For both traditions, the maxim that "there is no salvation apart from the church" holds true, in part because "salvation" is not simply an internal, individual, and post-mortem concern, but a visible, corporate, and this-worldly act of God. 

So there you have my brief gloss on four key commonalities between Reformed and Anabaptist traditions. If you think of other commonalities, or have questions about the ones listed here, I'd love to hear from you in the comment section below.