William Estep, Professor of Church History at Southwestern Baptist Theological Seminary (Ft.

Worth, Texas), summarizes the work of early Anabaptist leaders and their teachings. He surveys a vast array of material, giving short biographies of more than a dozen leaders and summarizing some of their doctrines. The main text is easy to read; references and details are given in 425 footnotes. The bibliography includes 105 books and 56 articles. After Estep described the first baptism, January 21, 1525, he commented, "This was clearly the most revolutionary act of the Reformation. No other event so completely symbolized the break with Rome" (11). These men and women were no longer trying to reform the old church, but rather creating a new one -- an idea with interesting parallels to believer's baptism itself. A history book does not necessarily have a theme of its own (apart from the historical developments it claims to report). Themes may develop, though, as the author arranges the material to emphasize certain ideas. Estep does not overtly make a case or present an argument in favor of a particular point until the last chapter. Nevertheless, the events are reported in such a way to give two impressions: 1) noble martyrdom and 2) doctrinal divergence. Persecution and martyrdom are undeniable facts of the Anabaptist story, but Estep appears to emphasize them to gain the sympathies of the readers. Estep presents the Anabaptists as sincere, pious, zealous, faith-filled, Bible-believing martyrs. Anabaptists may have been all of those, but Estep may be painting them in the most favorable light. He says little about the Mnsterites and the militant Anabaptists that caused their own martyrdom; he does not acknowledge that Anabaptist zeal was often greater than their wisdom. Doctrinal divergence is another theme developed by Estep's arrangement of the historical material. Chapters 1 and 2 present the Anabaptists as a united group. Blaurock, Grebel, and Manz, though different in personality, are clearly in doctrinal harmony with one another. Sattler, chapter 3, is very close. Hbmaier, chapter 4, wrote influential treatises on baptism and religious tolerance, but he did not adhere to the strict nonresistance of earlier Anabaptists. Chapter 5 introduces greater diversity with Denck, Hut and Marpeck; chapter 6 the Moravian communal experience under the leadership of Wiedemann, Reublin, Hutter and Riedemann. Chapter 7 details the development of yet another doctrinal tradition within Anabaptism, in Holland and northwest Germany, through the influences of Hofmann, the Mnsterites, Obbe and Dirk Philips and Menno Simons. Chapter 7 ends with doctrinal dissension and the schism of the Waterlanders. One is left with the impression that the movement is chaotic. A Mennonite historian might have minimized the centrifugal forces. After Estep presents the divergent elements, he then draws Anabaptism back together with three chapters that summarize Anabaptist theology. He concentrates on conversion, baptism, discipleship and church-state relations -- issues important in Baptist history. He gives less emphasis to nonresistance and community than a Mennonite historian might have. It was interesting to review the historical development of doctrines we often take for granted; it was exciting to read of individuals who zealously championed arguments that resonated with my own views.

In chapter 11, Estep examines Anabaptist influence on the Baptists. Though he admits the connection is controversial, he presents the evidence in a way that emphasizes the connection. He notes that Smyth instituted believer's baptism after going to Holland, where there had been an English-speaking Anabaptist congregation as well as numerous Mennonite congregations. "It is not altogether accurate...to say that he `borrowed' these ideas from the Mennonites. Doubtless they caused him to rethink his doctrine of the church in the light of the New Testament. Yet it was the New Testament which convinced him" (221). Later, Smyth and most of the congregation joined the Mennonites. Helwys did not join them, but before he could make such a decision, he would have been forced to study Anabaptist doctrines. "Helwys did not know it, but on each of the disputed points...there were continental Anabaptists who agreed with him" (222). "While Smyth's view became identical with that of the Waterlander Mennonites, Helwys' view was closer to that of Balthasar Hbmaier" (225). "In subsequent years the General Baptists were to reflect consistently their indebtedness to the Mennonites, whom they always considered as brethren" (222). Mennonites may feel that this chapter doesn't belong in an Anabaptist history, since they believe themselves to be true inheritors of the Anabaptist tradition and Baptists at best a divergence far from Anabaptist thought. However, this chapter on Baptist connections seems to be the raison d'tre for Estep's book. Estep is a Baptist historian, and we should expect him to be most interested in that connection. The connection may be the reason Estep emphasizes the doctrinal diversities within Anabaptism -- if the umbrella term "Anabaptist" is large enough to include Hbmaier and Hutter, it is large enough to include Baptists, too. However, the definition of "Anabaptist" may be a weak point. Estep briefly notes that he restricts the term to Bible-based "biblicists"; other radical reformers are better termed spiritualists or rationalists (15-16). He does little to defend his manner of categorizing Mntzer or Denck; he barely mentions the Anabaptists of Poland and Slovakia. Perhaps he avoids a precise definition to emphasize the diversities and to keep the umbrella larger. In a book that covers so much material, it is almost inevitable that some contrasts or comparisons will be glossed over. Estep writes that the Schleitheim Confession may have been written against the teachings of Denck and Hut, who disagreed with the South German and Swiss Brethren "on the role of the Bible in the life of the believer" (77). However, nothing else is said about the controversy; neither Denck's nor Hut's view of the role of the Bible is explained. The reader is left hanging. Estep writes that Hbmaier "did not sufficiently evaluate the arguments of his opponents" (160); but he later comments that Hbmaier presented Zwingli's arguments so well that "One gets the distinct impression that Zwingli could not have presented his own position better if he had been present to do it himself" (161). Can both be true? Two additions would improve the book. 1) Better maps. Any American book that refers to numerous small towns in 16th-century Europe must have maps. Estep includes only three, which poorly indicate the political rulers of the areas mentioned. A map for each chapter would have been helpful. 2) A chart

summarizing the doctrinal viewpoints of the major leaders would give a pictorial indication of both diversity and unity within Anabaptism. The Anabaptist Story is helpful for several reasons: 1) It compresses a multitude of facts into a well-written story. 2) Extensive footnotes and bibliography point the reader to many other sources of information. 3) Though obviously sympathetic to the Anabaptists, Estep gives a viewpoint slightly different from most Anabaptist histories, since almost every other book about Anabaptists is written and published by Mennonites. Review by Michael Morrison