Discussion Questions

Dean Taylor described Leonard Schiemer leaving both the priesthood track and the Franciscans because it all “seemed empty” and later “wicked”; what does Schiemer’s refusal to settle for religious forms suggest about what God is actually after in a person, and where do you see the temptation in your own life to accept “empty” spirituality because it is respectable? JumpstartAnother way to ask: Schiemer quit religious life because it felt “empty” and later “wicked.” What does that say God wants in a person besides religious habits, and where are you tempted to accept a “respectable” but empty faith?

Schiemer wrote from prison, “If I did not place all my confidence in the Lord, I would fall…He forsakes no one who trusts him,” while also admitting torture, hunger, and dread of death; how does that combination challenge modern evangelical expectations about assurance, emotional stability, and what “trusting God” should feel like? JumpstartAnother way to ask: In prison Schiemer said he fully trusted God, but he also felt torture, hunger, and fear of death. How does that challenge the idea that “trusting God” should always feel calm and confident?

In Schiemer’s “little flask” reply, he says the drink is “a contrite, crushed, and sad heart pounded by the mortar of the cross…pressed under the press of tribulation,” and that the way of salvation is “narrow at the top but wide at the bottom”; how does this image confront the assumption that God’s primary aim is immediate comfort, and what might it change about how you interpret your own suffering? JumpstartAnother way to ask: Schiemer compares true faith to a crushed heart shaped by the cross and says the way to salvation is “wide at the bottom.” How does this challenge the idea that God mainly wants you comfortable, and how might it change how you see your suffering?

Schiemer’s “three kinds of grace” move from law/light (conviction) to Christ/divine righteousness through the “furnace of suffering,” then to joy by the Spirit; how does this sequence correct (or disrupt) the way you were taught to think about grace, and which “grace” do you tend to want without accepting the others? JumpstartAnother way to ask: Schiemer describes grace as a path: conviction, then Christ through suffering, then joy by the Spirit. How does that differ from how you learned about grace, and which part do you want without the others?

Schiemer’s “three kinds of baptism”—Holy Spirit, water, blood—includes the claim that water baptism is like sealing a letter and “no one would seal a letter without knowing what it contains,” concluding that infant baptism is “sealing an empty letter”; what would it require for your baptism (or church membership) to be a “sealed letter” with real contents, and how would a church discern that without sliding into hypocrisy or mere externalism? JumpstartAnother way to ask: Schiemer says baptism is like sealing a letter—you should know what’s inside before you seal it. What would need to be true for your baptism (or church membership) to have real meaning, and how can a church check that without becoming fake or focused only on outward signs?

Dean highlighted Schiemer’s preferred phrasing “the Word became flesh and dwelt in us” and the line “we believe in God, not on God”; how does that push against “faith as agreeing to a creed,” and what would change in your daily obedience if you truly treated Christianity as Christ’s indwelling life rather than a new set of correct commands? JumpstartAnother way to ask: Schiemer stressed Christ living in us, not just believing the right ideas about God. How does that challenge “faith = agreeing with a creed,” and what would change in your daily choices if you saw Christianity as Christ living through you?

The lesson suggests Marpeck may have been shaken by Schiemer’s execution—after exposing Anabaptist-sympathizing miners, he left town two weeks after Schiemer was beheaded; what does this storyline reveal about how God can use the witness of suffering Christians to convert or awaken compromised believers, and where might your own “career safety” be blinding you? JumpstartAnother way to ask: Marpeck may have been shaken by Schiemer’s execution and left town soon after. How can the suffering of faithful Christians wake up people who are compromised, and where might your desire for career safety be blinding you?

Dean said Marpeck argued for a visible, incarnate church—“both spirit and flesh”—and contrasted that with “modern American evangelicalism and classic Anabaptism”; what practices in your church life signal that you believe the church is a real, embodied community (not just an invisible idea), and what practices signal the opposite? JumpstartAnother way to ask: Marpeck argued the church should be a visible, real community, not just an invisible idea. What in your church life shows you believe that, and what shows you don’t?

Sattler’s letter to the Strasbourg reformers stays unusually warm (“dear brothers in God”) while clearly breaking fellowship over concrete issues (baptism, Supper, sword, oath, ban) and pleading for mercy toward prisoners; what does his tone and content suggest about God’s priorities for truth, conscience, and love when Christians must separate, and how would that reshape the way your group handles disagreement and division? JumpstartAnother way to ask: Sattler stayed kind in tone but still broke fellowship over serious issues and asked for mercy for prisoners. What does this show about balancing truth and love when Christians disagree, and how should it change how your group handles conflict and division?

In Sattler’s trial he affirmed nonresistance even against a Turkish invasion (“we ought not to resist them…Thou shalt not kill”), yet said he would sooner fight the so-called Christians persecuting believers because they are “Turks after the Spirit”; what does this expose about how God evaluates “Christian” violence and state power, and what would it cost you—politically, financially, and socially—to live as if Christ’s kingdom is truly “not of this world”? JumpstartAnother way to ask: Sattler refused to fight even invaders but said persecuting “Christians” were worse in a spiritual way. What does this say about how God views Christian violence and government power, and what would it cost you to live like Christ’s kingdom is not of this world?