Acton Institute Powerblog

Mere Comments: The Neo-Anabaptist Temptation

Share this article:
Join the Discussion:

Today at Mere Comments I highlight what I’m calling the “Neo-Anabaptist temptation.”

Check it out.

Jordan J. Ballor Jordan J. Ballor (Dr. theol., University of Zurich; Ph.D., Calvin Theological Seminary) is a senior research fellow and director of publishing at the Acton Institute for the Study of Religion & Liberty. He is also a postdoctoral researcher in theology and economics at the VU University Amsterdam as part of the "What Good Markets Are Good For" project. He is author of Get Your Hands Dirty: Essays on Christian Social Thought (and Action) (Wipf & Stock, 2013), Covenant, Causality, and Law: A Study in the Theology of Wolfgang Musculus (Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 2012) and Ecumenical Babel: Confusing Economic Ideology and the Church's Social Witness (Christian's Library Press, 2010), as well as editor of numerous works, including Abraham Kuyper Collected Works in Public Theology. Jordan is also associate director of the Junius Institute for Digital Reformation Research at Calvin Theological Seminary.


  • Roger McKinney

    I don’t think it’s fair to Anabaptists to take one feature of their movement, pacifism, and label another group as neo-Anabaptist because they agree with one feature even though they disagree on everything else.

    I don’t want to try to separate the wheat from the tares, but I’m suspicious of evangelicals who go “neo-Anabaptist”. Socialists call themselves everything but socialist in an attempt to deceive the gullible. I think a lot of theologically liberal people are calling themselves evangelical for similar reasons. There is no way that Jim Wallis is an evangelical.