Discussion Jumpstarter
Study leader reference - not a definitive answer
Question 3
When the Schleithaim Confession says, “it is not appropriate for a Christian to serve as a magistrate,” and connects magistracy with “steel and iron” versus the church’s “armor of God,” what assumptions about discipleship and church life are being taken for granted that many modern Protestants no longer share?
Another way to ask: When the Schleithaim Confession says Christians shouldn’t be magistrates because the state uses “steel and iron” and the church uses the “armor of God,” what view of following Jesus and church life is it assuming that many Protestants today don’t share?
Discussion Jumpstarter
Direct Answer
The speaker presents Schleithaim as assuming discipleship is a whole-life “change of allegiance” where the church’s mission is spiritual warfare by Christ’s teachings, not wielding coercive power, so the offices tied to the sword don’t fit Christian vocation.
- Schleithaim (1527) says “it is not appropriate for a Christian to serve as a magistrate,” and contrasts “worldlings…armed with steel and iron” with Christians armed with “the armor of God.”
- He highlights the church’s weapons: “truth, righteousness, peace, faith, salvation, and the word of God,” implying a distinct kind of warfare.
- He says early Christians “said the same thing” about not serving as magistrates, tying the Anabaptists to pre-Constantinian patterns.
- He insists the two-kingdom view is not “one kingdom, the church and the state,” but “two kingdoms” requiring “genuine allegiance to just one.”
- He connects this to soldier language: Christians endure hardship but must not “entangle” with “affairs of this life.”
- He argues many Protestant theologies still have “Christendom…tucked inside,” meaning they assume political involvement can be a normal extension of discipleship.