RELIGIOUS ENCYCLOPEDIA
Anabaptists Anacletus
in 1525, were those who held an tipedobaptist views. After the war Strasburg became the center of the Anabaptists and, after 1529, when it was visited by Melcbior Hoffmann (q.v.), " the evil 2. In Stras- genius of the Anabaptists," it was burg and the center of their propaganda. Hoff- Munster. mann united to the usual Anabaptist views, belief in himself as the inspired interpreter of prophecy and as inspired leader generally. He declared that he was one of the " two witnesses " of Rev. xi. 3 ; that Strasburg was to be the New Jerusalem, and the seat of universal dominion; and that non-resistance might be given up. These views he preached with great effect through East Friesland and the Netherlands, and his followers called themselves " Melchiorites." After he had been thrown into prison (1533) Jan Mattbys, a baker from Haarlem, appeared in Strasburg and claimed to be the other " witness " of the Apocalypse; but he altered the programme by transferring the capital of the kingdom of the saints to Miinster, and advocating force in maintaining it. After sending four apostles, one of whom was the notorious John of Leyden, he came thither himself (Feb., 1535), and led a successful revolt against the magistracy and bishop of the city. In Apr., 1535 he was killed and was succeeded by John of Leyden who caused himself to be proclaimed king, and declared polygamy to be the law of the kingdom. Meanwhile the city was besieged by the expelled bishop aided by the neighboring princes and by the imperial troops. If half that is said to have gone on within the city be true (the reports come from very prejudiced sources), fanaticism was there the order of the day. Hence the defense was lax, owing to dependence on divine power to work deliverance. Nevertheless, the siege lasted many months, and treachery within rather than assaults without at last opened the gates on June 25, 1535 (see Munster, Anabaptists in). The fanatical Anabaptists were universally taken as typical, and to this day when Anabaptism is mentioned it is supposed to be the equivalent of absurd interpretation of Scripture, blasphemous assumption, and riotous indecency. Miinster was, however, only the culminating point of fanaticism engendered by persecution, and Anabaptism in itself, strictly interpreted, is not responsible for it.
Bibliography: The sources are the writings of Anabaptists, the official records of proceedings against them, and the writings of their opponents. Of the extensive literature, the following works may be mentioned: C. W. Bouterwek, Zur Utteratur und Geschichte der Wiedertaufer, Bonn, 1864; C. A. Cornelius, Die niederlandischen Wiedertoufer Munich, 1869; E. Egli, Die Zuricher Wiedertaufer, Mirich ,1878; idem, Die St. Gallen Wiedertaufer, 1887; H. b. Burrage, History of the Anabaptists in Switzerland, ~;<W i • 1882; L- Keller, Die Reformation und die amen Reformparteien, Leipsic, 1885; R. Nitsche, Geschichte der Wiedertaufer in der Schweiz, Einsiedeln, 1885; id n' Der Anabaptismus in Tirol, Vienna, 1892; 1804-' v Kommunismus der mahrischen Wiedertaufer, 7 '< >u ,Kautsky> Der Kommunismus im Mittelalter im Mitalter der Reformation, Stuttgart, 1894, Eng. transl., t^TnT in Central Europe in the Time of the ReformatZ' ■ °°?0n' 1897; H' Lfldemann, Reformation und Taufer- 189e'V t?" VerMltnis zum christlichen Princip, Bern, Kifl t j eath' Anal>apti8m from its Rise at Zwickau to *' LonQ°n. 1895; E. Muller, Geschichte der bernischen
Taufer, Frauenfeld, 1895; K. Rembert, Die Wiedertaufer im Herzogtum Julich, Berlin, 1899; G. Trumbult, Die Wiedertaufer, in Monographien zur Weltgeschichte,' vii Leipsic, 1899; E. C. Pike, The Story of the Anabaptists, in Eras of Nonconformity, London, 1904; the biographies of Anabaptist leaders, especially that of Balthasar Hubmaier by H. C. Vedder, New York, 1905, and works on the Reformation. See also the works mentioned in the article, MCnstek, Anabaptists in.
ANACHORITE. See Anchoret.
ANACLETUS, an"a kli'tus: The name of one pope and one antipope.
Anacletus I.: Roman presbyter at the close of the first century. The hypothesis of Volkmar, that he had no historical existence is opposed by the prevailing unanimity of the Greek and Latin lists of the popes. These differ, however, in the place which they ascribe to him, some naming him fourth and some third. The latter is the older order. As the name in Greek is sometimes written Anenkletos and sometimes Kletos, the Catalogus Liberianus and other early authorities were betrayed into the mistake of making two distinct persons. It is impossible to determine his date. Twelve years is the longest time assigned to his pontificate. The assertion, that he, as well as Linus and Clemens, was consecrated by St. Peter, sprang from the tendency to connect him as closely as possible with the beginnings of the Church. That he met a martyr's death under Domitian, or, as Baronius and Hausrath assert, under Trajan, can not be adequately demonstrated. His festival in the Roman Catholic Church falls on July 13.
(A. Hauck.)
Bibliography: Liber pontificalis, ed. Duchesne, vol. i., pp. lxix.-lxx., 52; G. Volkmar, Ueber Eunodia, Eunodius, und Anaclet, in Baur and Zeller, Theologische Jahrbiicher, xvi. 147-151, Tubingen, 1857; A. Hausrath, Neutestamentliche Zeitgeschichte, iii. 391, Heidelberg, 1875; J. B. Lightfoot, The Apostolic Fathers, I. i. 201 sqq., London, 1890; A. Harnack, in Sitzungsberichte der Berliner Akademie, 1892, 617-658; idem, Litteratur, II. i. 70 sqq.
Anacletus II. (Pietro Pierleoni) : Antipope, 1130- 38. He was descended from a Jewish family which had grown rich and powerful under Gregory VII., studied in Paris, and later became a Cluniac monk. Paschal II. recalled him to Rome, and in 1116 made him a cardinal. He accompanied Gelasius II. on his flight to France, and after his death took a leading part in the elevation of Calixtus II., who made him legate to England and France in 1121, and, conjointly with Cardinal Gregory, who was to be his rival for the papacy, to France in 1122. It is impossible to determine how far the description of him as an immoral and avaricious prelate is based on the enmity of his later opponents; but it is certain that even under Paschal II. he was already laying his plans to be made pope. On Feb. 14, 1130, he attained his aim so far as to be chosen by a majority of the cardinals, though not to be enthroned before nine of them had elected Gregorio Papareschi as Innocent II. Anacletus used both his own resources and those of the Church to win over the Romans, and Innocent was obliged to flee. In Sept., 1130, Anacletus allied himself with Roger of Sicily, and thus made a decided enemy of Lothair the Saxon, who was already inclined to support Innocent, and now, with England and
Anagrnost Anastasius