Following Jesus’ Voice: Liberty of Conscience
John 10:27-30, Acts 13:43-52

Over the last two weeks we have been hearing about the Anabaptists – radical dissenters also known as the left wing of the Reformation – groups of Christians who followed their conscience and formed church communities that separated from the Protestant churches. These foreparents of our faith, as Ray Gingerich called them, began churches that continue in the present in groups such as the Mennonites, the Amish, and the Waldensians. But as Baptists we too have a historical link to the Anabaptists. All around Europe in the century following the Reformation were groups of Christians who were dissatisfied with the expressions and practices of faith found in the established protestant churches. In England two groups emerged: Puritans who were aiming to purify the Church of England from within and Separatists who felt constrained to totally separate and form a new church. Like their European counterparts, these groups came under persecution for speaking out. One of the possible consequences of dissenting would be being burnt at the stake as a heretic. An important names in our Baptist history is John Smyth (that’s Smyth with a y), a clergyman who had been ordained in the Church of England but had established a new congregation of like-minded separatists. Although tolerated for a while they came under pressure and so in 1608 Smyth led a group of separatists to the Dutch Republic on the continent, and the few years the groups spent there could be seen as the formative time for a distinctive Baptist faith which emerged among these English emigrants. Their close contact and interaction with continental Anabaptists led the congregation to firm up new views on matters of doctrine. One aspect about which they became convinced was the practice of believer’s baptism, and in 1609 John Smyth baptised first himself and then his congregation. One of his flock was Thomas Helwys, another key name to remember. Helwys formulated a confession of 27 articles called "A Declaration of Faith of English people remaining at Amsterdam in Holland" (1611). Like other Anabaptists, their church was born in the midst of religious persecution. Not surprisingly, then, an emphasis on religious freedom or liberty of conscience was central to their faith and practice. In1612,  John Smyth  wrote regarding the role of the magistrate, the secular authority. He said, "the magistrate is not by virtue of his office to meddle with religion, or matters of conscience." That same year Helwys and twelve of the new Baptist congregation returned to England with an aim to speak out against religious persecution, and they founded the first Baptist congregation in London. Helwys is recorded as writing that the King of England could "command what of man he will, and we are to obey it," but, concerning the church, "with this Kingdom, our lord the King hath nothing to do." This was an early statement about the separation of church and state. Baptists and other similar groups were called “free churches” to distinguish them from state churches. They believed the church should be composed of true believers, people who had consciously submitted themselves to the Lordship of Christ. A state church whose members included all born into that state would by definition include people who were uncommitted or Christian in name only. The church was to be an alternative to society, not a mirror of it. But like at the time of the early church, its members could still have a great influence in society by the way they lived their lives.

Helwys wrote a treatise on his beliefs which he sent to King James I with an appeal for religious tolerance. It was probably the first English book defending the principle of religious liberty. Let me quote from it in its original olde English:

“Mens religion to God, is betwixt God and themselves; the King shall not answer for it; neither may the King be judg between God and man.  Let them be heretikes, Turks, Jewes or whatsoever, it apperteyenes not to the earthly power to punish them in the least measure.”

For Helwys, religious liberty was a right for everyone, even for those he disagreed with – he mentions heretics, Turks and Jews, even Roman Catholics. He did not petition the king to enlist the power of the state to force Baptist convictions on others.  He petitioned the king to let everyone worship as they pleased. Anything less was a loss to the community, as well as to the individual. No parliament should legislate against it. No monarch should overrule it.

The book was not favourably received by the King though. Helwys’ public stance on religious freedom meant that he was to languish in Newgate prison for four years, where he died in 1616, at the age of 40. The British publishing house Smyth and Helwys commemorates these two inspiring pioneers of religious liberty, stating on their website that “their writings and lives brought freedom to a time when Christians were less free to express their faith.”

One other name to remember is Edward Wightman, a contemporary of Helwys and also a Baptist minister. He also presented a petition to King James I which stated his beliefs – questioning the practices of infant baptism and the eucharist and perhaps most dangerously suggesting that “Christianity is not wholly professed and preached in the Church of England, but only in part.” For these heresies Wightman was burned at the stake – the last person to be executed in such a manner for heresy.

To conclude the short history lesson, Baptists were amongst the first groups of pilgrims to America, (including Whiteman’s son John). They established churches there that have been and continue to be enthusiastic about mission. It was Baptists from the United States who established the denomination in Europe, but having studied with Baptists from various European countries I would say all of them also acknowledge continental Anabaptists in their heritage. Not many Baptist churches, however, adopted the distinctives of pacifism and communal sharing of goods which are more prominent in other churches claiming Anabaptist heritage.

Religious freedom, on the other hand, is a well recognised part of our background and our identity. The community that John Smyth established called themselves “the Lord’s free people”. Whiteman and Helwys were martyred in the name of freedom. William Knibb was a Baptist who fought for the abolition of slavery. In 1939 the Baptist World Conference meeting in Atlanta in the USA affirmed this conviction with a plea for "the full maintenance of absolute religious liberty for every man of every faith or no faith at all". During the cold war, Baptists were incessant in their defence of religious liberty in Eastern Europe.  Martin Luther King is known for his speeches and protests in the name of freedom. In an article written in the Guardian newspaper last year British Baptist Minister Alec Gilmore recalls his own denomination’s public welcome of their government's decision not to let police shut down mosques where radical Islam had been preached. The freedom that has been affirmed from our denomination’s beginnings is Freedom from a church tied to the state. Freedom of conscience. Freedom to follow Christ.

Our forebears were known as radicals and dissenters. The desire to return to the roots of the faith made them radical, and the critique of the church and society that had become corrupted by power made them dissenters. The roots of the faith for non-ecclesiastical churches can only ever be the teachings of the bible, and especially of the witness to the teachings and practice of Jesus Christ. In the scriptures we see all human beings as God's creatures, epitomised in Jesus and the way he treated people.

The episode from Acts gives us an example of religious freedom at work. Paul and Barnabas were missionaries convinced that they had good news to share with the people of their time. As we see throughout the book of Acts they always first visited the synagogue in the cities their travels took them. Some heard their message and accepted it, but many rejected it. But these first missionaries knew they had nothing in their message or their delivery that would compel listeners to agree. They didn’t bring their message under cover of arms. They didn’t have bodyguards or a police escort. Their words were all they had to offer, and their confidence in the Holy Spirit. They always tried to use persuasion rather than compulsion. They believed it was their right to proclaim, but this was balanced by the right of their listeners to reject. The evocative phrase “they shook the dust off their feet” was an echo of the instructions of Jesus recorded in Luke’s gospel when he sent his disciples out to share good news in the towns of their region. The message had to be given, and in fact nothing could stop the spread of this good news. In Acts we hear “the word of the Lord spread throughout the region” But it was a message given freely and could also therefore be freely rejected. By shaking the dust from their feet the messengers indicated they had taken nothing from those who had rejected them. But even this rejection was from another perspective good news, because it meant a turn in their mission’s focus to the Gentiles. And what do we read? “When the Gentiles heard this they were glad and praised the word of the Lord, and many became believers.” The passage ends in joy – something that only comes from knowing freedom.

The passage we read from John uses the image of Jesus as the shepherd whose sheep hear his voice and follow him. A few years ago I was preaching on this passage and I used the relatively new film at the time called “Babe” to talk to the children about this concept. In Babe the chief sheep is Ma, the elderly ewe of the flock. Babe the pig is able to get the flock to follow her directions because they know Ma’s voice and trust her. When Ma’s voice tells them the instructions that Babe has given, they follow. So there is trust and knowledge involved.

The image of Jesus as the good shepherd is one of the best known and best loved images of Jesus. It fits perfectly with Psalm 23 – a psalm that is so familiar and comforting that we hear it at all sorts of occasions, not only inside church services. The good shepherd is attentive, diligent, protective, courageous and compassionate. The bible says that we are the sheep of his pasture. And to hear the voice of Jesus is to hear the word of life. “I will give them eternal life, and they will never perish. No one will snatch them out of my hand.” In this Easter season we remember and celebrate that Jesus has even done away with the power of death. The book of Revelation declares this: “They will hunger no more, and thirst no more, the sun wil not strike them, nor any scorching heat; for the Lamb at the centre of the throne will be their shepherd, and he will guide them to springs of the water of life, and God will wipe away every tear from their eyes.” (Rev 7:16-17) This is the conviction with which Paul and Barnabas and Helwys and Whiteman and Martin Luther King preached and wrote and stood in the face of opposition. They knew that not even death could separate them from the joy of knowing they were following the voice of their Lord.

Because as our forebears would tell us, sometimes we have to follow that voice into rocky places. The passage in John speaks of security and safety in Jesus’ care, but as we have been reminded throughout Lent and again over the past two weeks, following Jesus means taking up our cross and walking the road to Golgotha. Paul and Barnabas followed Jesus and suffered for it, being thrown out of cities or ending up in prison several times. Smyth followed Jesus and had to become an exile to avoid persecution. Helwys and Whiteman followed Jesus and became the first Baptist martyrs. Martin Luther King followed Jesus and was shot in the prime of his life. These are all dramatic stories, and probably we won’t be asked to become martyrs for our faith. But if we follow Jesus’ voice we may well be led down a different path to most of our contemporaries. Because standing for freedom means standing against the status quo. It means moving out of comfort zones. It means standing against armed conflict and seeking to be peace-makers. It means standing against consumerism and identifying with the poor. It means standing against a thoughtless use of our planet’s resources and making changes to our lifestyle that may be sacrificial and have little effect short term but knowing that we are doing it for a greater good. It means standing up against exploitation and discrimination of all kinds.

The need for the Baptist Church to be a community of radical dissent and freedom of conscience is as great as ever. When we follow Jesus’ voice we are offering the world a better way, centred in the one and only Lord who can set us free. It is a great tradition, and it is a great calling, to be a people who stand for freedom. May God bless us as we continue to listen for the voice of Christ each day.