Discussion Questions

Dean Taylor calls the Moravian Anabaptists “the Marine Corps of the Anabaptists,” not mainly because of community of goods but because “all of their life was a means to be able to produce this mission machine”; what specific features in the transcript (speed, organization, risks, priorities) justify that comparison, and what would have to change in our church life for that description to fit us? JumpstartAnother way to ask: What details in the transcript (speed, planning, danger, and what they cared most about) make the Moravian Anabaptists seem like a “mission machine”? What would our church have to change for someone to say the same about us?

In the clash between Hans Hut’s urgent missionary drive (“Jesus is coming back…we’ve got to hurry”) and Hubmaier’s move toward “settling down in Nickelsburg and starting the state church,” what do you hear Dean Taylor warning against, and what do you think modern Christians lose when stability and institutional security become the dominant goal? JumpstartAnother way to ask: In the conflict between Hut’s urgency and Hubmaier’s plan to settle into a state church, what is Dean Taylor warning us about? What do Christians lose when comfort and safety become the main goal?

Dean Taylor says Jesus spoke of “a broad way and a narrow way” and “didn’t seem to give…a middle way,” then quotes Tieleman van Braght’s image of martyrs squeezing through the gate “so tightly that they left flesh on the post”; what “middle way” do Christians today instinctively want as a footnote, and how does that desire show up in how we plan family life, careers, and church growth? JumpstartAnother way to ask: What “middle way” do many Christians today wish Jesus had offered between the broad way and the narrow way? How does that show up in how we plan our families, jobs, and church growth?

The lesson argues that Anabaptist missions was not just “command and duty” but “eschatological expectation,” fueled by oppression and a sharp “dualism between the kingdom of God and the kingdom of the world”; how does suffering and pressure clarify what we believe about God’s coming reign, and what does comfort tend to do to that same belief? JumpstartAnother way to ask: How can suffering and pressure make God’s coming kingdom feel more real to us? What does living in comfort usually do to that same belief?

Dean Taylor criticizes the way modern mission history can call William Carey or Hudson Taylor “father of missions” while ignoring the 1527 Augsburg “missionary conference”; what might that selective memory reveal about which kinds of Christians and which kinds of obedience the mainstream church prefers to celebrate? JumpstartAnother way to ask: If mission history celebrates Carey or Hudson Taylor but ignores the 1527 Augsburg meeting, what does that say about the kind of Christians the main church likes to honor? What kind of obedience might it be overlooking?

The Martyrs Synod allegedly sent “apostolic teams of three” and, within two weeks of mandates against them, Augsburg sent “more than two dozen missionaries,” with most dying within three years; what does that level of willingness to be expendable suggest about their view of God’s worth, and how would that challenge the way we evaluate “wisdom,” “preparedness,” and “effectiveness” in missions today? JumpstartAnother way to ask: What does their readiness to be sent quickly and die for the mission say about how valuable they thought God was? How does that challenge how we judge “wise,” “prepared,” and “effective” missions today?

Dean Taylor highlights that the Anabaptists rejected dualisms like “sacred/secular,” “clergy/laity,” and even separating “proclamation of the gospel and social concerns”; what modern church categories or budget lines depend on those separations, and what would it look like in your actual week if those separations were treated as false? JumpstartAnother way to ask: What parts of today’s church depend on splitting life into categories like sacred/secular or clergy/laity? What would your week look like if you stopped treating those splits as real?

The transcript quotes, “As non-resistance was love’s negative expression, missions became its positive affirmation”; how does that definition of love confront both (a) political activism that relies on coercion and (b) private spirituality that avoids costly engagement with neighbors? JumpstartAnother way to ask: If non-resistance is love saying “no” to violence and missions is love saying “yes” to action, how does that challenge politics that uses force? How does it also challenge a private faith that avoids costly help for neighbors?

Peter Riedemann insists a messenger must be “filled with the Spirit,” “blameless,” “feel the power working in him,” and must be chosen and confirmed by the congregation—rejecting those who “go their own way to please themselves…[choosing] a fat living with sheep to be shorn”; what would your group look for as evidence of a true call versus ambition, and how would that reshape who gets sent, supported, or platformed? JumpstartAnother way to ask: How would your group tell the difference between someone truly called by God and someone just chasing status or comfort? How might that change who gets sent, funded, or given a platform?

The commissioning service described in the “Garner Codex” includes missionaries urging the congregation to stay faithful in “visiting the sick and the imprisoned,” “providing for the poor and unemployed,” and supporting missionaries with “prayers and…material provisions,” even caring for widows and orphans if the men are executed; what concrete commitments would our congregations have to adopt for “every member…regarded as a missionary” to become real rather than inspirational language? JumpstartAnother way to ask: If every member is really a missionary, what specific promises would our church need to make (care for the sick, poor, prisoners, and families of executed missionaries)? What would we actually have to do, not just say?