"Sacred Roots: Separation—a Swiss Brethren Article of Faith" by Edsel Burdge

The one may be overpowered by another, two can withstand him, and a threefold cord is not quickly broken.

Welcome to Strength to Strength. It's a blessing to be here together with you again today. Today we're going to continue our Sacred Roots series, and I believe this is talk number 25 in this series. And we're heading towards about a year and a half of slowly working through the history of God's people. And our, our, our, um, vision statement for this series goes like this: to humbly and lovingly rediscover the history of God's people in order to reground, renew, and retether our faith and practice.

And today's talk will be, again, looking at S-Satler and the Shlakeim Confession, um, things that are very, uh, inspiring, things that are challenging to, uh, that were challenging in their day and for us today as well. Brother Etzel's talk this morning, um, is titled Sacred Roots: Separation from the World, Lessons from the Early Anabaptists. And his description goes like this: This message explores the roots of early Anabaptism, the 500th anniversary of believers' baptism in Zurich, 1525, and the Shlakeim articles of 1527. Learn how Michael Satler and the Swift Brethren emphasize separation from the world, non-resistance, discipleship, and living as a distinct people under Christ's kingdom.

Join us to discover why the term Anabaptist was a nickname and why many rejected it, the story of the first believers' baptism in Zurich in 1525, how the Shlakeim Confession, seven articles, shaped Swift Brethren life, Michael Satler's powerful defense of faith and separation, the biblical call for 2 Corinthians 2 to come out and be separate.

This teaching challenges modern Christians to rediscover what it means to be truly set apart from the world while faithfully following Jesus.

And some of us maybe have never met Brother Etsel, um, and his bio goes like this: Etzel Burge works at the Young Center for Anabaptists and Pietistic Studies at Elizabethtown University—or I'm sorry, College. He and his wife, Jennifer, are members of Shippensburg Christian Fellowship, and they are blessed with six children and four grandchildren.

Brother Etsel, it's a blessing to have you here this morning. Thank you for being willing to join us here early Saturday morning and share this talk. It's a blessing to have you with us. And before we get started, let's just bow our heads for prayer.

Let's pray. Father, we thank you for today. We thank you that we can, again today, serve you. And Father, we, we know that, um, we need much of your wisdom and much of your strength to live faithfully as your people in our day. And Father, um, the, the things of, of this world, um, really press in at times, and I think especially of raising up the next generation to live faithfully for you. Father, we need, we need your wisdom.

Father, I thank you for men of faith that we can look to back through the ages and be inspired by their conviction and their zeal for you. And Satler is, is one of those. And so, Father, I pray that you would bless Brother Etzel as he brings this message on, on this, um, this historical figure. Father, I pray that we would not in any way lift him up unduly, uh, but that we could look at his life and be challenged to live faithfully in our day.

Father, also, we pray for the world that we live in here in the 21st century. Father, there's wars and maybe even a new war now currently happening. Father, we ask that you would bring peace, um, to this world, that you would destroy the demons of war. Father, and Father, I pray that, um, as a people, as your body on earth around the world could rise up and love our enemies and show kindness, uh, to those around us.

So go with us today and in this talk, and we ask this in Jesus' name. Amen. Amen. Okay. All right, Brother Etsel, uh, you're the t the time is yours. Okay. Um, all right. Um, I have revised the title a little bit, um, uh, Separation: A Swift Brethren Article of Faith, rather than use the term Anabaptist, because I really don't like the term Anabaptist.

Um, I've been working on a project recently, uh, it's gonna be a several-year project on a new translation of, uh, The Martyr's Mirror. And, um, my role in the I'm on the editorial committee. My role in the editorial committee is to, uh, write the footnotes. And so I've been working through the martyr the this new translation and so on. And I'm, um, I'm struck by the number of times in which the their interrogators asked the different martyrs, "Are you an Anabaptist?" and they categorically said, "No. We're not an Anaba we're not Anabaptist. Uh, we baptize with true baptism upon confession of faith." I don't actually call myself an Anabaptist. Uh, if people wanna s-say that I am, I don't protest too much.

Um, but, uh, I've, um, uh, they believe that they were not rebaptized, but that they were baptized with true baptism upon confession of faith. All right. Uh, so I've used the term Swift Brethren because, um, that's the tradition of, quote-unquote, "Anabaptism" that, um, actually many of us would have roots in, uh, whether it's, uh, even genealogically or and so on, but also spiritually and so on. Um, and I and it was a term that actually they di they did accept, at least by the second generation.

Okay. But we're gonna start with the first believers' baptism in Zurich, January 21st, 1525. Uh, this is, uh you'll see the picture to the right. This is from a contemporary map of the city of Zurich. Uh, and you see the Grossmünster, that large two, um, uh, spire, uh, church there. And to, uh, off to the, uh, uh, I guess it would be my right and so on, um, there's a little place called Flustrat. And that's where Felix Mons's mother lived, and the first baptisms were held in her home. And, um, so, um, and I think you can go there today and see that building, though I've never done that. But, uh, in the account of this first baptism taken from the Hutterite Chronicle, it says, "One day when they were meeting, fear came over them and struck their hearts.

After prayer, George Blaurock stood up and asked Conrad Grebbel in the name of God to baptize him with true Christian baptism on his faith and recognition of the truth. With this request, he knelt down and Conrad baptized him. And then the others turned to George in their turn, asking him to baptize them, which he did.

And so, in great fear of God, together they surrendered themselves to the Lord. They confirmed one another for the service of the gospel and began to teach the faith and to keep it. This was the beginning of separation from the world in its evil ways." Now, I want you to just kinda look at that last phrase. "This was the beginning of separation from the world in its evil ways." Now, that's a later kind of Hutterite interpretation of what was going on there, um, in which they identified these, uh, this first baptism as a break with the whole state church, uh, system and an emphasis on personal faith, which results in amendment of life and, and holy living.

Okay? Now, um, but, uh, as, uh, Anabaptism, uh, we sh uh, uh, sh and I'm using that term, uh, because I can't, uh, figure out anything else to use, even though I use it reluctantly. Anabaptism, uh, was not a monolithic movement. Uh, it was grassroots from the very beginning. It was diffuse. Um, there were people brought to it, uh, various, uh, previous understandings that they incorporated into it. And so there was variety. There was differences and so on. Um, and there were also some very sometimes some very strange little things happening. According to Johannes Kessler, a reformed, uh, leader in St. Gallen, uh, he, uh, recounted that there were, um, there were, uh, Anabaptists who, uh, taking Jesus's teaching that you should become like little children, acted like little children and so on.

Now, whether that's true or not is always a bit of a question to me because, um, you know, you shouldn't believe every scuttlebutt that's, uh, said about somebody that, uh, said by somebody who's opposed to them because they're probably likely to believe any false rumor that f uh, floats around.

But nonetheless, there wa were difficulties. And as a result, a group of leaders met on February 24th, 1527, at Schleidheim. And there, they were trying to address some problems, uh, problems that devel I mean, here it is, less it all just a little over two years. The previous, uh, January, Felix Mons, one of the early leaders, had been executed in Zurich by drowning a year be a little bit before that. Conrad Grebbel had died of the plague.

Um, the movement had scattered. Uh, it was already being repressed and so on and being persecuted. Uh, George Blaurock was m had moved into the Tyrol, where he was doing some evangelism and so on. Um, and so this gathering of leaders very quickly on, on decided they need to get together and they need to work some understandings out about a common way, a common purpose, and a common, uh, uh, approach. And the result was the seven articles of Schleidheim. Now, uh, some people refer to this as the Schleidheim Confession. That's a that's a name that was given to it maybe in the late 19th, early 20th century. It's really not a confession of faith like Dortrecht is.

Uh, it's a brotherly agreement. Uh, it's on seven articles that they've come together and defined, uh, who, who they were and what their practices were. And it's, it's also, uh, basically, uh, a church d uh, we could think of it more almost as a church ordinung or, or a discipline or a standard, um, uh, to, uh, to help define what they hold in common and, and, uh, how they're going to approach their world the world and their witness.

And one of the leading persons in this was a man by the name of Michael Satler, a fairly recent convert. Um, he had been a monk, actually a prior in St. Peter's Monastery in the Black Forest. Uh, he left that around 1525, um, and, um, married, um, and, um, kind of was on the fringe or circulating in radical circles, but doesn't really seem to actually join the, quote-unquote, "Anabaptist" until maybe the summer of 1526. So, uh, he's, he's very new to this, but he quickly, promptly, uh, rises to leadership, probably because as a monk and as a prior, he was an educated man. And the Benedictine, um, order that he belonged to had a long tradition of Bible reading, Bible study, and so on.

So he had probably been reading the Bible for, for years. Uh, uh, he wasn't an old man, but, uh, but, you know, for a number of years, so he was acquainted with it. Uh, and so he, like, uh, Jesus talked about the scribes, uh, who come to the kingdom, and it brings out their treasure house, uh, bring out of their house treasures, both new and old. And I think Michael Satler is a is an example of that and why he probably rose to such, uh, prominence. Uh, we know that Michael Satler was the main author of the Schleidheim articles because in 1557, there's a letter from two Swiss Brethren leaders to Menno Simons. And they talk about a gathering that would ha was held that year, uh, in which, uh, about 50 or more leaders gather together from all from Switzerland, from Arabia, from the Rhineland, and so on, to, uh, work out some questions and, um, again, to come to some agreements.

And in that letter, they say that, uh, they had a person there. One of the persons who was participating had, uh, his house. It was in his house in Schleidheim that the meeting was held where he said Michael Satler, uh, uh,'s writing was adopted. And so, um, in the f in the 1550s, they were attributing the Schleidheim articles, uh, Michael Satler being the main author of them. But of course, it's he's the author of them, but it's a group decision to adopt these articles as their understanding. And so it starts out and says, "Dear brothers and sisters, we who have been assembled in the Lord at Schleidheim on the Radden, make known in points and articles to all who love God.

That as concerns us, we are of one mind to abide in the Lord as God's obedient children, His sons and daughters, we who have been and shall be separated from the world in everything and completely at peace." So here we see right from the very beginning two themes. One is that they want to be obedient children of God and that that requires a separation from the world, um, and an agreement among each other as how to do that. Okay? Now, what's the reason for, uh, gathering at Schleidheim? And by the way, the images I have here are pages taken from the first printing of the Schleidheim articles in German. Um, and it says, "A very great offense has been introduced by certain false brethren among us, so that some of us turned aside from the faith in the way they intended to practice and observe the freedom of the Spirit and of Christ.

But lasciviousness and self-indulgence of the flesh, they think faith and love may do and permit everything, and nothing will harm them nor condemn them since they are believers." As I mentioned before, Anabaptism was a very diffuse movement. There was different understandings about some things. Um, and, um, there was also, uh, ki uh, there was, as, uh, Luther found out when he began, uh, his Reformation, that people did things with it that he did not expect them to do with it. And so you have this idea of, you know, now we're free from the Spirit. We're no in the Spirit, in Christ. We're no longer bound by all the Catholic traditions and practices and so on.

Those are the works of man. And so there are people who run with that. They go with it, and they do, uh they use it as, as a-an excuse for self-indulgence of the flesh. And so Schleidheim is weighing in against that. And, um, all right. "Observe you who are God's members in Christ, that faith in the Heavenly Father through Jesus does not take such form. It does not produce and result in such things as these false brethren and sisters do and teach. Guard yourself and be warned of such people, for they do not serve our Father but their father, the devil. But you are not that way, for they that are Christ have crucified the flesh with its passions and lust.

You understand me well and know the, the brethren whom we mean. Separate yourselves from them, for they are perverted. Petition the Lord that we may they may have the knowledge which leads to repentance. And pray for us that we may have constancy to persevere in the way which we have espoused for the honor of God and of Christ's Son. Amen." And so very be at the very beginning, there's this w there's this understanding. You know who we're talking about here. And part of this being separated from the world is to separate ourselves from false brethren, people who, uh, yes, they may seem yes, they agree with us as far as the need for believers' baptism and so on, but they are still going in a path and direction that is against Christ, and we're not to have anything to do with them.

Now, the Schleidheim articles, uh, are, are sort of, um there's a per a precursor to them, and that is a letter that Michael Satler wrote to Martin Booser and Wolfgang Capito. These were two, uh, Protestant leaders in the city of Strasbourg.

Uh, Strasbourg, uh, was, uh took qu-quite a little while. There was sort of an open window for about five or six years as Booser and Capito sort of figured out what direction the Reformation was going to go in their city. And so what's interesting is that during that open window, uh, they took a rather tolerant approach to, uh, people, uh, who were there. And so it became kind of a refuge for a period of time. Hans Denk was there. Um, uh, later, um, um, a pilgrim, Marpeck, was there. Uh, Kasper Schwenckfeld, who was, um, a person who, uh, eventually uh, believed that it wasn't the baptism and, and the Lord's Supper and any of the ordinances were not important, were not necessary, and so on.

And not one could basically, you know, whatever, you know, the important thing is what happened in your heart. Now, he did believe that one should live a holy life, but the idea of a gathered body of believers living out the kingdom of God wasn't really part of his picture. So but so all these people here later on, Melker Hoffman comes, um, and, uh, there are these prophetesses and so on. Uh, it's a really interesting mix. Um, and so there're, there're actually different kinds of, of A-Anabaptists there. Uh, and Michael Satler is there for a brief period of time. He encounters Hans Denk, doesn't think very much of him. And he may have been thinking about Hans Denk when he was writing some of this and probably thought of Hans Denk as being one of these false brethren.

Uh, but in this letter to Booser and Capito, written promptly early 1527 before the, uh, Schleidheim articles, uh, he spells out, uh, what some, uh, some points here. There's a there are about 20 points. And he says, "Cr uh, and this letter, by the way, is the only document that exists that is was h written by Michael Satler. I mean, it's written in his hand, and it's signed by his signature and so on. Here's the, uh, first page of it here. Uh, it's a front and a back. Uh, but he, uh, goes on and says, "Christ came to save all those who would believe in him alone. He who believes and is baptized will be saved.

He who does not believe will be damned. Faith in Jesus Christ reconciles us with the Father and gives us access to him. Baptism incorporates all believers into the body of Cl Christ, of which he is the head. Christ is the head of his body. Other believers are the congregation. As the head is minded, so must its members also be. The foreknown and called believers shall be conformed to the image of Christ." So there's a number of givens here that he talks about. One of the things that's interesting is that baptism incorporates all believers into the body of Christ. You know, the early Anabaptists did believe that baptism symbolized something, but they also believed that it was the means by which we were incorporated that we ha have are incorporated into the visible body of Christ.

All right? And that, that, um, that body or that, uh, that group of believers or that congregation, uh, must mind the head, uh, and, and, um, must be conformed to the image of Christ. "Now, Christ is despised in the world, so also are those who are his. He has no kingdom in the world, but that which is of this world is against his kingdom. Believers are chosen out of the world. Therefore, the world hates them. The devil is the prince over the whole world in whom all the children of darkness rule. Christ is the prince of the Spirit in whom, uh, all who walk in life live. The devil seeks to destroy. Christ seeks to save.

The flesh is against the Spirit, and the Spirit against the flesh. Those who are spiritual are Christ. Those who are carnal belong to death and to the wrath of God." So we already we see here a strict two-kingdom, uh, paradigm. You have the kingdom of God. You have the kingdom of this world, which is identified with the kingdom of Christ. And, um, and, um, uh, they're opposed to each other. And we also have this, this, uh, this dichotomy between the flesh and be and the Spirit. All right?

And then he goes on to say, and by the way, that's Martin, uh, Booser, uh, one of the, uh, leaders there in Strasbourg. "Christians are fully yielded and have placed their trust in their Father in heaven without any outward or worldly arms. Uh, the citizens citizenship of Christians is in heaven, not on earth. Christians are members of the household of God and fellow citizens of the saints and not of the world. But they are true Christians who practice indeed the teachings of Christ. Flesh and blood, pomp and temporal, earthly honor in the world cannot comprehend the kingdom of Christ. In some, there is nothing common between Christ and below." So in these articles, we see a very, very strong emphasis on the two kingdoms, separation from evil, and that, uh, we are not to be part of the world and its system.

And that includes the use of force, uh, use of arms. Now, the key text, uh, for the Anabaptist was 2 Corinthians 6. Uh, the, uh, title pa I have a title page there of an early, uh, Swiss Brethren biblical concordance. Now, this is not a concordance in the way we think of it, like Strong's exhaustive concordance. This is more like a, a topical Bible, though it's a, a select topical Bible. Uh, there's, um, oh, uh, several dozen, uh, topics that, uh, are covered. And under each topic, uh, the verses, uh, that pertain to that topic are, are, are, um, given. And, uh, I mean, they're actually they actually give us the text of them. And, uh, even though with the printing press, um, uh, pushing Bibles out and lo-lots of Bibles are being printed, lots of New Testaments are being printed, uh, they're still somewhat expensive.

Not everybody has one and so on, though they're, they're certainly much more plentiful. But one of the things that's really interesting is that these biblical concordances, uh, exposed a lot of people, a lot of believers to the to the scriptures, and they could they actually, uh, could memorize these scriptures. In fact, one of the things that's interesting in the various debates, uh, the, uh, these learned, uh, r uh, um, um, Protestant and Catholic interrogators or debaters and so on are often somewhat astounded by what they consider to be unlettered people's ability to quote scripture and so on. And that was probably because, um and, and to quote them in, um, in sort of a rational way, to quote them, uh, and to address the topics at hand, and that's somewhat because of the availability of these biblical concordances.

But in the in the, uh, uh, section on, uh, under the topic of separation, uh, it gives the key text, 2 Corinthians 6, "Do not put on a foreign uh, yoke with unbelievers." And this translation may run a little bit differently than what you're used to. This is actually a translation of the German, uh, which is, uh, used in the Froscher, uh, translation of, uh, the Ger uh, German's translation of the Bible. "Do not put on a foreign yoke with unbelievers. For what does godliness have in common with ungodliness? What does light have in common with darkness? How does Christ agree with below? Or what part does faith have with unbelief? And what similarity does the temple of God have with idols?

For you are the temple of the living God. And as God says, 'I will dwell among them and walk among them and will be their God, and they shall be my people.' Therefore, go out from their midst and separate yourselves, says the Lord, and touch your touch nothing unclean. Then I will receive you and be your Father to you. And you shall be my sons and daughters, says the Lord Almighty." So that is the that's one of the foundational articles I mean, foundational text for their understanding of separation. This call to come out of the world, to be separate from it, to be the fathers, uh, and to, to and to walk in the way of Christ.

So that takes us to the article in Schleidheim on separation. It's the fourth article. And again, we agree as follows on separation. "A separation shall be made from the evil and from the wickedness which the devil planted in the world. In this manner, simply that we shall not have fellowship with them, the wicked, nor run with them in the multitude of their abominations. This is the way it is. Since all who do not walk in the obedience of faith and have not united themselves with God, so that they wish to do his will are a great abomination before God. It is not possible for anything to grow or issue from them except abominable things." And one of the things, uh, that we have to keep in mind is that, um, from the very beginning and it's, it's also, uh, even before the beginning, uh, the before the first baptisms, in a, uh, letter in late 1524 that Conrad Grebel and Felix Mons and company wrote to Thomas Münster, um, the one of the things that they're very concerned about is the, uh, the is the amendment of life, uh, a conversion, a, uh, new birth experience that results in a change in one's heart, uh, a, a tendence to the work of the Holy Spirit, and that results in obedience to the, the teachings of Jesus and, uh, results in a change in one's being and one's actions and so on.

And that's a very important uh, even across the board, even if you would take somebody like Balthazar Hoppmeyer, who, uh, makes, uh, makes justification for the use of the sword and so on by believers and so on, he even he is concerned about amendment of life, uh, that, uh, there be a, uh, a renunciation of per of, of immorality, of living in a s a lascivious, um, wicked way. So that's a that's a common theme throughout, throughout the, um, thing. Uh, John Orrier, I remember, uh, uh, an Anabaptist scholar of a previous generation. I remember him saying one time that the Anabaptists talked more against drunkenness than they ever did about nonresistance. Not that they didn't talk about nonresistance, but drunkenness was a big problem, um, among, uh, uh in, in 16th-century Europe.

In fact, there's a story, uh, told about a person at an at an inn or a tavern who wasn't drinking. And his, um the people around him thought that he must be an Anabaptist. It turned out that he wasn't, but, uh, they simply assumed because he was not, uh, participating in their drunken revelry, that he was an was an Anabaptist.

Um, okay. Now, one of the things that, uh, Schleidheim goes on to say, "For truly all creatures are in but two classes, good and bad, believing and unbelieving, darkness and light, the world and those who have come out of the world, God's temple and idols, Christ and below, and none can have part with the other. To us then, the command of the Lord is clear when he calls upon us to separate from the evil. And thus, he will be our God, and we shall be his sons and daughters. He further admonishes us to withdraw from Babylon and the earthly Egypt, that we may not be partakers of the pain and suffering which the Lord will bring upon them."

Uh, one of the things that is very interesting is that, um, the, the early, uh, Anabaptists did believe, um, very clearly that, um, there were two ways and that these two ways had two different destinies. Uh, uh, for believers who had put their trust in Christ, who lived according to Christ's teachings and so on, there was the promise of eternal life and so on. For those who did not, there was going to be judgment and eternal death. They're very clear a-about that. All right? Now, they go on, and they talk about separation from all popish and repopish works.

Um, and this is the, the illustration I have there. It's a very it's actually a Protestant illustration. Uh, it's a pro-Lutheran illustration. You have on the one pane, Luther preaching the word of God. You have the Lamb of God up there, uh, takes away the sins of the world. But you'll notice also that they're baptizing infants. Uh, people are listening there to Luther preach. Uh, to the side, you see them, uh, practicing the, uh, sacrament of, uh, the of communion. Unlike Catholics, they're giving the cup as well as the bread to the laity and so on. Um, and of course, uh, for Luther, the, um, the church was the place where the word was rightly preached and the sacraments were rightly ministered.

And so we're seeing a picture of that. And then on the other side, uh, again, we see, uh, Johann Tetzel preaching indulgences. We have the pope there. Um, and, um, we have, um, all kinds of, uh, images. Uh, and I this is a really anti-Catholic kind of cartoon. But, uh, even though, uh, the early Anabaptists would agreed with, uh, Luther about, about the Catholic Church in many ways and so on, they were also were very critical of the Lutherans and of the Zwinglians because they felt that they were basically, uh, being repopish. They were kind of doing the same thing over again with a few, uh, maybe, uh, minor changes and so on.

And so they said, "From all this, we should learn that everything which is not united with our God and Christ cannot be other than an abomination, which we should shun and flee from. From this is meant all popish and repopish works and church services, meetings, and church attendance." Uh, one of the things that's interesting is, is that they would not go to Catholic churches. They would not go to Protestant churches. Um, and, uh, because they considered them to be abominations, they would not participate in their worship and so on. Um, one of the ironies that I find today among present, uh, certain, uh, uh, uh, conservative Mennonites and so on, particularly with our singing groups, is the desire to go into one of these great big, fancy cathedral-like, uh, arched ceiling Gothic arched ceilings and so on and do a performance.

I guess the argument is the acoustics is good. Uh, probably is. But, um, the early Anabaptists would have been appalled by them doing that. Um, and but anyhow, maybe it's a different day. Maybe it's not. But, um, in a later writing, a later Swiss Brethren writing concerning separation, "Why we do not attend preaching at the papal, Lutheran, and Zwingli churches," they say, "They do not c follow 1 Corinthians 14 in their churches." Now, what's that mean? Well, 1 Corinthians 14th, if you remember, is the teaching where, uh, Paul is saying, "This is how you're supposed to conduct your services." Uh, you know, if somebody has a psalm, if somebody has has a teaching and so on, take your turn.

Do it in an orderly kind of way and so on. But it wasn't limiting the teaching and the preaching and the sharing and so on in the meeting to cer a certain elite, to a specific kind of, quote-unquote, "clergy." Uh, unlike, uh, like both in the Catholic Church and in the in the Protestant churches. Here we have an illustration of Zwingli preaching in the Gross Münster. And of course, he is the he is the voice of authority. He's the official spokesman and so on. He's the, the, um, the, the preacher that has been appointed by the city council to preach and so on. And the people are supposed to just simply sit there and listen and take it in.

Okay? Uh, so there is a very so the congregation is basically a spectator. They're not really participating, contributing, or anything like that. They're spectators and so on. And so one of the critiques that the early Anabaptists bring against this is they do not follow 1 Corinthians 14 in their churches. They coerce people in matters of faith and conscience. They want the worldly sword to rule on the gospel. And Zwingli, of course, is a good example of that. He, uh, he when he's pushed about, "Well, what are what are you going to do about the Mass?" This is in 1523. Well, he said, "The Lord the Lord's encounter will decide that." And he is he is, uh, countered, uh, by Simon Stumpf about not so Master Zwingli.

The word of God decides. And now, interesting, Simon Stumpf is part of this kind of r-radical sort of circle of young men, uh, in which Conrad Grebel and, and Felix Mons are also part of. But in the end, he doesn't go with them. Okay? He, he stays with Zwingli. Okay?

But, uh, the idea of using force to, uh, rule on the gospel. Their actions testify to the lack of the Holy Spirit. Uh, the early Anabaptists believed that if somebody was, was, uh, converted, they were given the Holy Spirit, and that Holy Spirit empowered them to live a life of obedience to Christ. And they did not see they did not see that the actions of, of either the Lutheran or Zwinglian or the papish, uh, people, uh, or churches resulted in, in, um, in a holy living. The band is not used in their churches, so the supper is not truly kept. Balthazar Hoppmeyer, um, wrote an, uh, a writing about the band. And he said, "You can have baptism, and you can have communion.

But if you do not have the band, if you do not, uh, have, have the band, you do not have a church." So the band are the idea that one i that the boundaries of the community have to be defined and that when people are disobedient, they need to be corrected. Hopefully, there's repentance. But if there's not, then they need to be a, um they need to be, uh, put out of the out of the congregation.

They don't follow Christ's order to first teach and then baptize. And, uh, of course, that's dealing with the, uh, Matthew 28 and Mark 16, where the instruction is to go into all the world, preach the gospel, and those who believe baptize and teach them all things. And so that's the order in which they saw it. And that's one of their main arguments about why infant baptism is not correct because infants can't believe. And if they can't believe, then they shouldn't be baptized. They abolish the cross of Christ by not living rightly. And so those are the reasons why, why they say we shouldn't go to the papal, Lutheran, and Zwingli churches. Uh, I'll leave it up to you to decide whether or not, uh, any of these points, uh, apply for us today.

All right? And then it goes on to say, "We should shun and flee from drinking houses, civic affairs, the commitments made in unbelief, and other things of that kind which are highly regarded by the world and yet are carried on in flat contradiction to the command of God in accordance with all the unrighteousness which is in the world. From all these things, we should be separated and have no part with them, for they are nothing but an abomination, and they are the cause of our being hated before our before our Christ Jesus, who has set us free from the slavery of the flesh and fitted us for the service of God through the Spirit whom he has given us."

So again, here we kind, kind of see, uh, you know, the, the their very real concern about upright living. Okay? Flee from drinking houses, from civic affairs, commitments made in unbelief. That might be referring to oaths. It might also be referring to membership in guilds which controlled, um, craftsmen and so on.

Okay? And here we have the idea of not being unequally yoked with unbelievers in any kind of commitments and any kind of actions. And then it goes on to say, "Therefore, separation also, uh, uh, includes therefore all shall also fall away from us the diabolical weapons of violence such as sword, armor, and the like, and all their use to protect friends or against enemies. By virtue of the word of Christ, you should not resist evil."

Okay? So one of the things that they, they emphasized that Schleidheim emphasized now, it has another article on the sword, which is also a very a very important article. But, um, as a pre-predecessor to this, he's talking here about the fact that for, for believers who are separated from the world, they have also shed this thing that they call the diabolical weapons of violence. Now, one of the things I think you'll, you'll see it as we've been going through this article is the sh is the stark, sharp distinction that is made between the world and the kingdom of God, between the kingdom of darkness and the kingdom of Christ. And it refers to weapons of violence as being diabolical, that they have their root and their source in the devil, and that we should we should not have anything to do with that.

And it's based on what Jesus specifically said, "You shall not resist evil." You don't we won't use force or violence to resist it. Now, one of the things that's interesting is that Michael Sattler's trial on May 18th, 1524, one of the accusations that was brought against him is that he has said, "If the Turk were to come into the land, one should not resist him. And if it were right to wage war, he would rather go to war against Christian the Christians than against the Turks, which is, after all, a great offense. It takes the side of the greatest enemy of our holy faith against us." Now, this is the this was of immediate concern to, um, the judges and other people at Michael Sattler's trial because just the year before, at the Battle of Mahacus, the Ottoman Turks had defeated the Hungarians in a major battle.

And they were uh, and people were really just, uh, concerned that the Turks and the Turks were on a roll. And, uh, uh, in fact, uh, they, they eventually attacked Vienna, besieged it. It was thrown off and so on. And the Turks continued to be a threat, um, in Europe up until the up until the late 17th century.

Okay? So, um, and of course, they controlled, uh, the much of the Balkans, uh, during those centuries and so on. And so, uh, for Michael Sattler, I mean, this, this is just astounding. And people are horrified that he, he would have said anything against anything like this and so on. But in response to that, he says, "If the Turks come, he should not resist it. For it is stands written, 'Thou shalt not kill.' We should not defend ourselves against the Turks or other persecutors, but with fervent prayer should implore God that he might be our defense and our resistance. As to me saying that if waging war were proper, I would rather take the field against the so-called Christians who persecute, take captive, and kill true Christians than against the Turks, this was for the following reason: the Turk is a genuine Turk and knows nothing of the Christian faith.

For if he is a Turk according he, he is a Turk, according to the flesh, but you claim to be Christians, boast of Christ, and still persecute the faithful witness of Christ, thus you are Turks according to the spirit." Again, that kind of dichotomy there. He said, "A Turk is a real Turk. He's doing what Turks do." Okay? "But you claim to be Christians, but you're acting like Turks. Christians do not use, do not kill." That's categorical. They do not do it. So I'll let you decide. What do you do? What, what should be our attitude toward people who claim to be Christians but think it's all right to kill? I mean, we see today in our in our society, in our nations here what, uh, some refer to as the rise of Christian nationalism and so on.

Um, and, uh, I mean, that's, uh, uh, Schleidheim would say that is being Turkish. That is not being Christlike, but that's being like a Turk. All right? So my question is, in closing, is, how separated from the world are we today?

You know, uh, in Paul's I mean, in, in the book of Revelation, when Christ appeared to John, he had these things to say to the seven churches. And he said to Ephesus, "I have this against you, that you have left your first love." To Samerna, uh, who was faithful, he said, "Be faithful unto death, and I will give you the crown of life."

To Pergamos, he said, "I have a few things against you because you have those who hold the doctrine of Balaam to eat things sacrificed to idols and to commit sexual immorality. To Thyatiria, I have a few things against you because you allow that woman, Jezebel, to teach and seduce my servants to commit sexual immorality and eat things sacrificed to idols.

To Sardis, I know your works and that you have a name that you are alive, but yet you are dead. To Philadelphia, because you have kept my command to persevere, I also will keep you from the hour of trial which shall come upon the whole world to test those who dwell on the earth. And to the Lyceans, he says, "Because you're lukewarm, neither hot nor cold cold nor hot, I will vomit you out of my mouth."

My question is, what, what which of these messages would Jesus say to us today? I mean, we would hope that he would have the word that to us that he had to Samerna and that he had to Philadelphia, where he talks about the fact that they've been faithful, that they have persevered, and the promise then that he makes them that he will give them a crown of life and that he, he will, uh, keep us from the hour of trial which shall come. And I think that we will be facing if we're not already facing, uh, an hour of trial. And one of the things I think that we are particularly facing and I, I see this all across the board among our plain people is an erosion of separation.

Um, and I think it's a very serious, uh, issue that we're facing. Are we truly going to be separate from the world? Are we going to renounce the world and all its values, uh, for the kingdom of Christ? Do we see it in that stark kind of way that Schleidheim projects it? Some people today say, "Well, you know, it's just too stark. That's too categorical," and so on. But is it? Is it?

Where do we need to say we are not going to have anything to do with the devil's kingdom, with the world, and all the alarmants and all the enticement that it offers us? Thank you very much.

Thank you, Brother Etzel, for that inspiring challenge for us this morning.

I really was touched by that and challenged by that. Uh, just last night, my family and I, we had an extended conversation about why we do some of the things that we do, um, as as non-Baptist people and had to do with separation.

And it's a it is a very relevant topic for us today, separation at every level. May God help us. Uh, I was challenged with, with those 14 points. Very clear. Uh, there's no there's no beating around the bush. It's very, very clear, uh, where, where Sattler is.

Um, also, I find it interesting, um, some of their points of why they don't attend some of the other services.

I think, uh, that is one of the areas where, where oftentimes I see us being quite weak on. And it's, it's a challenge to know how to navigate. I, uh, I interact with a lot of at our café with a lot of different Christians from many different faith traditions. And I know that some of them are very sincere, uh, really are striving to follow Christ.

And how to relate to them, uh, is, is something that I think about often. Uh, I find it interesting that one of their points is they do not follow 1 Corinthians 14 in their churches. And I would love to hear a little more about that, um, what, what is meant by that. Uh, what did the typical anti-Baptist gathering look like compared to one of those services then and maybe even one of our services today? That could that could be interesting to hear you talk about that. And I always am so inspired by what Sattler's defense is on non-resistance. "Thus you are Turks according to the spirit." What a what a bold, bold what a bold man and so true.

Uh, one question. Yeah. So maybe you could talk a little bit more about the 1 Corinthians 14 service. And I, I, I agree with you, Brother Etzel, the, the singing groups using all the cathedrals. I, I just I find that hard to understand why our people do that. It's, um, I think every kind of every part of us should be screaming. There's, there's like a cognitive there should be some cognitive dissonance here why, why we would do that. Um, I'm, I'm with you on that. But yeah, um, what are what are some of the what, what is what is Sattler meaning by that 1 Corinthians 14? And then also, just a just a quick question before that, is all the artwork that you have here, where are you getting that?