- Today
- Holidays
- Birthdays
- Reminders
- Cities
- Atlanta
- Austin
- Baltimore
- Berwyn
- Beverly Hills
- Birmingham
- Boston
- Brooklyn
- Buffalo
- Charlotte
- Chicago
- Cincinnati
- Cleveland
- Columbus
- Dallas
- Denver
- Detroit
- Fort Worth
- Houston
- Indianapolis
- Knoxville
- Las Vegas
- Los Angeles
- Louisville
- Madison
- Memphis
- Miami
- Milwaukee
- Minneapolis
- Nashville
- New Orleans
- New York
- Omaha
- Orlando
- Philadelphia
- Phoenix
- Pittsburgh
- Portland
- Raleigh
- Richmond
- Rutherford
- Sacramento
- Salt Lake City
- San Antonio
- San Diego
- San Francisco
- San Jose
- Seattle
- Tampa
- Tucson
- Washington
Williamsburg Today
By the People, for the People
Anabaptist Activists Debate Confrontation vs. Compassion
Readers discuss the role of public protest and nonviolent resistance in the Anabaptist tradition.
Published on Feb. 26, 2026
Got story updates? Submit your updates here. ›
A discussion has emerged on the Facebook page of Anabaptist World magazine about the appropriate balance between public activism and quiet service within the Anabaptist faith tradition. Some argue that Anabaptism has historically combined nonviolence with public moral witness, while others contend that compassion should not require confrontation with state authorities.
Why it matters
This debate reflects an ongoing tension within Anabaptist communities about the role of civil disobedience and public protest versus a focus on individual acts of care and peacemaking. It highlights differing interpretations of the Anabaptist call to be "in the world but not of it" when it comes to engaging with social and political issues.
The details
The discussion was sparked by a recent article in Anabaptist World titled "Four Days in Minneapolis" that described powerful acts of activism. One commenter, Gene Rhodes, argued that this did not reflect the historic Anabaptist faith rooted in "quiet service, humility and separation from state power struggles." In contrast, Josef Voth contended that public protest against injustice has been a core part of the Anabaptist tradition since its origins. Meanwhile, MaryAnn Lee pushed back, arguing that Anabaptists should be "law-abiding citizens" and focus on "lobbying Congress to change the law" rather than "condemning as murderers" those enforcing it.
- The discussion took place on the Facebook page of Anabaptist World magazine on February 26, 2026.
The players
Gene Rhodes
A Facebook commenter who argued that the Anabaptist faith is rooted in "quiet service, humility and separation from state power struggles" rather than public activism.
Josef Voth
A Facebook commenter who contended that public protest against injustice has been a core part of the historic Anabaptist tradition.
MaryAnn Lee
A Facebook commenter from Williamsburg, Virginia who pushed back against public protest, arguing that Anabaptists should be "law-abiding citizens" and focus on changing laws through Congress rather than "condemning" those enforcing them.
What they’re saying
“Four Days in Minneapolis' (page 24) describes a powerful story of activism, but it does not reflect historic Anabaptist faith, which is rooted in quiet service, humility and separation from state power struggles. Our strength has always been in small acts of care, hospitality and peace, not in coordinated resistance or public demonstrations. Compassion for immigrants is essential, but compassion does not require confrontation.”
— Gene Rhodes, Facebook commenter (Anabaptist World)
“From its origins, Anabaptism has combined nonviolence with public moral witness, often in direct confrontation with state injustice. Early Anabaptists publicly rejected state churches, oath-taking, military service and coercive authority, actions that were inherently confrontational and led to mass imprisonment, exile and execution. Martyrdom was itself a form of public resistance. Later Mennonite history reflects the same pattern: public opposition to slavery, conscientious objection during both World Wars, sanctuary movements for refugees and civil rights activism. Public protest against harm to immigrants fits squarely within a long Anabaptist tradition of faithful, visible dissent.”
— Josef Voth, Facebook commenter (Anabaptist World)
“I agree we are to be peacemakers, but your articles reflect only one side. We are also to be law-abiding citizens, as Jesus was. As his church, we should not be the leaders of helping people break the laws regarding illegal entry into our country. Reporting that people are murdered by Immigration and Customs Enforcement is not showing love and compassion for everyone, and that includes ICE. Perhaps, as peacemakers, we should be lobbying Congress to change the law instead of condemning as murderers those who are enforcing it.”
— MaryAnn Lee, Facebook commenter (Anabaptist World)
The takeaway
This debate highlights an ongoing tension within Anabaptist communities about the appropriate balance between public activism and individual acts of compassion. While some see a tradition of nonviolent resistance, others argue that Anabaptists should focus on changing unjust laws through legal channels rather than confronting state authorities. Resolving this dilemma remains an important challenge for Anabaptists seeking to live out their faith in the public sphere.
