Many people make the mistake of equating the Anabaptists with some of the more liberal elements of Christianity we see today. It is something I saw hints of in reading The Naked Anabaptist and it seems to be gaining traction. It is almost as if people cannot differentiate between the widely divergent movements that have stood outside of the prevailing traditional church throughout the centuries.
For the Anabaptists, being counter-cultural meant not just standing against the dominant church, whether Roman Catholic or magisterial Reformer. It also meant at the same time standing opposed to the state powers that were inextricably linked with the church and that was simply not tolerated. Anabaptists were slaughtered by the thousands during the Reformation period and did not have the benefit of safe states to flee to. At best there were areas that they were more or less tolerated and that tolerance often evaporated leaving them on the run once more.
In contrast, the “counter-cultural” among the modern church are frankly nothing like the Anabaptists. The worst persecution they face are the frequent snarky blog posts by traditionalist bloggers. In many ways, the various contemporary movements that stand apart from the traditional church are far more like the world than distinct from it. Instead of trying to see the church become more Scriptural, these movement by and large seek to strip away anything that the world finds to be unpalatable in an effort to be relevant. There is essentially no sacrifice for being in this movement today.
Wearing cool glasses and putting styling gel in your hair is not radical and counter-cultural. Having your tongue ripped out so that you cannot preach the Gospel as you are being led to your death by being burned alive or drowned? That is counter-cultural.