Toward A Theological System Of Michael Sattler

By David Saxton

Among any serious study of Protestant martyrology, one would certainly find the heart-wrenching account of the cruel execution of a converted Romanist priest named Michael Sattler, along with his faithful wife, Margaretha. Sattler’s story is so fascinating yet tragic that, in recent years, it has been captured in a major motion picture. [1] However gruesome his end may have been, it is Sattler’s life—a life lived unto Christ and seeking the purity of the church—which ought to be remembered most by God’s people.

Sattler was not primarily a martyr; he was a pioneer biblical theologian of the “Radical” Anabaptists, or rather, the so-called free branch of the Protestant Reformation of the sixteenth century. He has been called by some the most significant leader of the first generation of Anabaptists, [2] as well as “an outstanding leader of Swiss and South German Anabaptism.” [3] John Yoder proposed that Anabaptism itself survived as a visible movement during its formative years, due to the leadership of Michael Sattler. [4] Though he died at the young age of thirty-seven, his influential legacy continues beyond the grave through his authorship of the Schleitheim Confession of 1527, the first formal doctrinal statement of the Anabaptist movement.

Because of the brevity of his life, history has left us only a small handful of Sattler’s written works. Among contemporary scholarship, there is much debate as to which of these works can actually be attributed to Sattler himself. Thus, because of the limited number of writings, it is often difficult to know what he actually believed or whether he ought to be labeled a theologian at all. Adding to the mystery about Sattler’s doctrinal beliefs is the question of exactly why he withdrew from fellowship with and criticized some of the magisterial Reformers.

It is therefore the burden of this article to show that, although journeying between medieval monasticism and Reformed theology, Sattler should be respected as falling within the broad stream of orthodox belief as an early Anabaptist and biblical theologian. In order to make its case, this paper will seek to set forth a basic outline of Sattler’s theological system from his own writings, recorded statements by witnesses, and from the correspondence of those with whom he maintained a dialogue. All those studying the primary source material of Sattler are indebted to the work of John H. Yoder, whose English translations of Sattler continue to serve as the standard. Finally, although a number of men have written on the theology of Sattler from the Anabaptist perspective, I will approach Sattler’s theology from the standpoint of appreciating Reformed theology and noting his departures from it.

The Formative Theological Influences On Michael Sattler

Before venturing into a reconstruction of Sattler’s theological system, it is necessary to understand more about the man himself. To this end, we will consider a brief biography of Sattler’s life, particularly focusing on the theological influences in his experience, as well as his reactions against other doctrinal systems. Sattler scholar C. Arnold Snyder divides Sattler’s life into four periods, [5] which we will generally use as we survey his life and theological influences: his early life and education, his life in monasticism, his transition from monasticism to Anabaptism, and his life as an Anabaptist, which will include his important interaction with Strasbourg Reformers, as well as his martyrdom.

Sattler’s Early Life, Education, and Experience in Monasticism

Michael Sattler was born at Stauffen in the Breisgau, near Freiberg, Germany, around 1490. [6] Since Stauffen was under the jurisdiction of the Roman Catholic Church at the time, [7] young Sattler was apparently noticed and set apart for higher religious education at an early age. After becoming a Benedictine monk at St. Peter’s monastery, he apparently attended classes at the University of Freiberg, [8] which was known for its humanist leanings. Although scholars differ on the amount of Latin, Greek, and Hebrew Sattler actually knew, they are uniformly agreed that he became a learned man for his day. Unlike some Anabaptist leaders, Sattler had a basic understanding of historical theology, such as the early church councils and their important decisions. [9] Although Freiberg was a staunchly Catholic city, Sattler’s university education would have introduced him to much of European Renaissance humanism, as well as medieval scholasticism.

Following his entrance into St. Peter’s monastery, a Benedictine cloister in the Black Forrest just outside of Freiberg, Sattler rose to become prior, second only to the abbot. [10] Due to a fire destroying the records, not much is known about Sattler’s experience at the monastery, but “there would seem to be every reason to consider monasticism as a potentially positive force, instrumental in shaping some of Sattler’s later views.” [11] Snyder feels that Sattler’s monastic background with the Benedictines shaped his future Anabaptist thinking in the following ways: 1) an emphasis on a disciplined community, 2) an emphasis on obedience to Christ and the following of His example, and 3) an emphasis on both the renunciation of the world and separation from it. [12]

Sattler’s Transition from Monasticism to Anabaptism

Thus far we have seen that Sattler had both positive and negative theological influences early in his life—positively, a good humanistic training in the ancient languages, and, negatively, the baggage of leftover medieval theology found in monasticism. However, the most powerful influence was now to be experienced in his life—the transforming power of the gospel.

During his stay at the monastery, Sattler had begun to study the Pauline epistles and possibly some Lutheran works. [13] It is also likely, in light of the peasants’ close association with his monastery, that he may have had personal contact with an Anabaptist from Oberlatt named Han Kuenzi. [14] His biblical studies, coupled with his apprehension of the “pomp, pride, usury, and great fornication of the monks and priests,” [15] led to his true spiritual conversion to Christ. Wiswedel asserts: “Like Luther, so Sattler also came to certainty of belief and salvation in the monastery. This inner transformation allowed the monk from St. Peter’s to take off his cowl and take on a wife.” [16] Having been freed from his disillusioned life as a son of Rome, Sattler left the monastery as a German Lutheran, married a former Beguine nun named Margaretha, and hoped to proclaim Reformation truths in his home area. His plans were soon altered, however, when he and his new bride were forced to flee to the more Protestant-friendly Zurich, Switzerland, since Ferdinand I was seeking to rid the Breisgau region of all “heretics.” [17]

Sattler’s Life As An Anabaptist

The next time Sattler is seen in history is March 1525, when he appeared in Zurich as an Anabaptist, having been influenced by both Conrad Grebel and especially William Reublin. [18] Like Grebel, Felix Mantz, and George Blaurock, Sattler probably was drawn to Anabaptism after being dissatisfied with Zwingli’s failure to implement biblical reforms quickly enough, especially the ending of the mass. Rather than waiting for biblical reform through the Zurich city council’s decision, Sattler moved ahead with the other Anabaptists leaders and began to powerfully and zealously preach Anabaptist doctrine, often in the forests around Zurich. [19]

Because of Sattler’s effective leadership abilities and growing influence, he was present at the third magisterially authorized disputation with the Swiss Brethren concerning infant baptism on November 6, 1525. [20] Unfortunately, reconciliation between these brethren did not occur because an actual debate on the biblical teachings of baptism was not allowed. The Zurich council simply delivered the Anabaptists an ultimatum: every infant now had to be baptized within eight days of birth or the family would suffer banishment. Although Zwingli once said, “I did not learn my doctrine from Luther, but from God’s Word itself,” [21] he did not allow this same soul liberty to his conscientious former students. Having suffered two arrests, Sattler was finally expelled from the Swiss Canton of Zurich on November 18, 1525. [22] Yet, it was during this time he developed his strong Anabaptist convictions, both through interacting with the founders of biblical Anabaptism, [23] as well as through debate with Zwingli. Though he returned to his hometown of Stauffen as an advocate and preacher of Anabaptism, he soon was forced leave this firmly Catholic region again. [24] Sattler and his wife then took refuge in the French Reformation city of Strasbourg. Although his experience with the Strasbourg Reformers would be much more amiable than that which he shared with Zwingli, Sattler was now willing to question and even reject certain Reformed views of the Bible.

Sattler’s Interaction With The Strasbourg Reformers

Sometime in 1526, Sattler arrived in Strasbourg, a city greatly affected by the Reformation through the leadership of Martin Bucer and Wolfgang Capito. Although a Reformed stronghold, Strasbourg still maintained a reputation in Europe for its religious diversity and toleration. [25] Of course, this kind of openness served as a religious magnet to draw in all types of dissenters, including a number of well-known Anabaptists. Two notable Anabaptist refugees already in the city when Sattler arrived were Hans Denck and Ludwig Haetzer. It seems as if Sattler was nearer in spirit and theology to the Reformers Bucer and Capito than to Denck and Haetzer. On December 24, 1526, after a debate with Bucer, Denck was forced to leave Strasbourg under order of the city council, while Sattler was allowed to remain in the city, eventually leaving of his own accord. [26] Although Bucer and Capito made many positive statements about Sattler’s character; it was actually Haetzer that made one of the few negative statements about him (outside his executioners), calling him “a shrewd and wicked rascal.” [27] Estep rightly concludes that “while both Haetzer and Denck were...not appreciated by Martin Bucer and Wolfgang Capito.... [that was different] with Sattler, who was highly esteemed by both Reformers.” [28] Whereas it would be difficult to prove that Denck and Sattler were vastly different in their basic theology and practice during their Strasbourg encounter, Bucer and Capito felt that Denck “disturbed [the] church exceedingly,” [29] while the more reasonable and peaceable Sattler was allowed to remain.

What then was the Strasbourg Reformers’ view of Sattler? To answer this question, we turn to written correspondence expounding the similarities and differences between the beliefs of Sattler and those of the Strasbourg Reformers. These letters also provide us a great deal of our understanding of Sattler’s own theology. First, we have Sattler’s “Parting with the Strasbourg Reformers,” which he wrote shortly following his departure from Strasbourg in early 1527. Though extremely gracious and irenic toward Bucer and Capito, [30] Sattler listed twenty reasons for why he was separating from them. The points were mainly concerning differences he felt he had with them about baptism, non-resistance, separation from the world, and about the magistrate’s relationship to Christians. [31] This letter is important because it shows that whereas Sattler disagreed with the Reformers to the point that they could no longer work together, he still accepted them as “dear brothers in God.”

Second, we have the “First Capito Letter,” written by Bucer and Capito to the Burgermeister and Council at Horb, May 31, 1527, following the execution of their friend, Michael Sattler. In this official letter, the Strasbourg Reformers show where they disagreed with Sattler’s theology, but scolded the city council for killing, rather than patiently instructing, this one who was “weak in the faith.” [32] They closed their letter by asking for the merciful release of Sattler’s followers who may be in error, but not heretics, writing:

Even if it might not be possible at once to convince them of all the secondary points, then one must take time until God give grace; for one should not break a bruised reed or quench a glowing flax.... They are nevertheless confessors of the faith and of the honor of God. [33]

Third, we have the “Second Capito Letter,” written at the same time as the first letter by Bucer and Capito in order to encourage and gently correct Sattler’s own congregation, following his death. Their language is warm-hearted and pastoral. While it certainly offered corrections to some of their faulty notions, such as Christians not being free to serve as magistrates, the tone is not so much to correct heretics as to comfort fellow Christians during a time of trial by fire. They warmly closed this letter: “To my dear brothers and sisters who are now testifying with their own bodies to Christ the crucified One, by their imprisonment and suffering at Horb.” [34]

Thus from these three letters of correspondence between Sattler, Sattler’s followers, and the Strasbourg Reformers themselves, one can gain a clear view of the relationship between Sattler’s theology and that of the Reformed faith. First, Sattler was clearly not coming down squarely on the side of the Reformed expression of the faith, particularly those of the magisterial Reformers. His parting letter shows that his views of believers’ baptism and church purity, coupled with his strict view of a Christian’s separation from any aspect of secular government, kept Sattler from remaining in the safe haven of Strasbourg.

Second, although Sattler was not thoroughly Reformed in his expression of faith, the Strasbourg Reformers considered him within Christian orthodoxy. The Strasbourg Reformers differed with Sattler over errors related to secondary matters, rather than matters of heresy. The fact that Sattler was clearly within broad evangelical orthodoxy becomes more apparent as one reads their written interaction. In their “A Faithful Warning,” the Reformers write to distinguish heretical Anabaptists from orthodox Anabaptists, such as Sattler: “Thus we do not doubt that Michael Sattler, who was burned at Rottenburg, was a dear friend of God, even though he was a leader in the baptism order.” [35]

Though the Reformers appreciated and respected Sattler, this is not to imply that they thought that his errors were unimportant. In the Capito Letters, they write, “This Michael was known to us here in Strasbourg and did hold to some errors regarding the Word, which we faithfully sought to show him by Scripture.” [36] Although clearly the Reformers “were not in agreement with him as he wished to make Christians righteous by their acceptance of articles,” yet they admired his desire for a pure Christian church. [37] Referring to the scriptural differences between him and the Reformers, they call them “secondary points,” “that in a friendly way [38] they [Anabaptists] might be better taught where they are in error, although in the main points of the faith and its meanings they are not all wrong.” [39] Thus, although differing with Sattler on the role of the magistrate, the extent of separation from the world, taking the oath, bearing arms, baptism, and the like, the Reformers called Sattler and his followers “confessors of the faith and of the honor of God and therefore children of God.” [40] They fairly defend Sattler’s followers, writing, “Their foundation is truly that we must hear Christ the Son of God and that he who believes in Him has eternal life.” [41]

Therefore, in their minds, the Reformers considered Sattler’s death a true Christian martyrdom and a great travesty of justice. Referring to their July 1527 “A Faithful Warning,” Williams notes that Capito and Bucer “pointed out that even though Tertullian erred as a Montanist Spiritualist, and Cyprian as an Anabaptist, they were rightly revered as true martyrs of the church. Bucer expressly distinguished Sattler favorably from Denck, for example, on the crucial issue of the atonement.” [42]

Third, Sattler’s theology was a hybrid of the Reformed doctrines of faith, coupled with expressions which resembled more of a medieval monastic spirit. Being fearful that some of the Reformation doctrines, such as justification by faith, may lead to an antinomian spirit, Sattler went to the other extreme of behaviorism or moralism. Leonard Verduin wrote that Sattler believed that the Reformers “throw works without faith so far to one side that they erect a faith without works.” [43] This could explain why Sattler’s Schleitheim Confession deals exclusively with behavior or practical matters, rather than beginning on firm doctrinal footing. Consider how the Reformers expressed their concern that Sattler mixed medieval monastic thought with Reformation theology:

Now we were not in agreement with him as he wished to make Christians righteous by their acceptance of articles and an outward commitment. This we thought to be the beginning of a new monasticism. We desired rather to the believing life by contemplation of the mercies of God, as Moses based his exhortations to good works, on the reminder of divine favors and of the fatherly disciplining of the people of God. [44]

So then, the Strasbourg Reformers were concerned with Sattler’s emphasis on submitting to a monastic-like rule of life, rather than changing their Christian behavior as an evangelical response to God’s love. Of this new monasticism, Finger wrote, “The Strasbourg Reformers, especially Wolfgang Capito, will find Sattler’s faith basically sound. Yet they will caution that he insists too legalistically on performing good works and separates the true church too sharply from society.” [45] Williams concurs that Sattler’s new monasticism or what could be called “evangelical monasticism” is what made the Strasbourg Reformers most uneasy with him. [46] So between the Reformers and Sattler, there was a significant difference in emphasis. While Sattler focused more on the fruits of personal righteousness, the Reformers started with grace as producing those fruits of righteousness. In conclusion, whereas Sattler was not comfortable with the Reformed expression of faith, he was clearly within evangelical orthodoxy. He could most precisely be considered a type of an evangelical monastic.

Sattler’s Departure From Strasbourg And The Writing Of The Schleitheim Confession

Although it is debatable whether Sattler’s departure from Strasbourg was premature and hasty, he apparently returned to Germany sometime near the end of 1526 at the invitation of William Reublin. Goetz believes that Sattler left Strasbourg only “when all hope of steering the Reformation in their own [the Anabaptists] direction had vanished.” [47] Sadly, Strasbourg was one of the last good opportunities for the Reformed and Anabaptist faiths to be mended together, if this was at all ever possible. Following this separation, Sattler started his pastoral work just north of Rottenburg. Horb became his center for evangelistic operations.

It is during this time in early 1527, just after Sattler left Strasbourg and following the martyrdom of Felix Mantz, [48] that Yoder wrote of Anabaptism: it “must be recognized as the coming-of-age of a distinct, visible fellowship taking long-range responsibility for its order and faith.” [49] By this “coming-of-age,” Yoder was referring to the meeting of the Anabaptists at the border town of Schleitheim, Switzerland, in order to formulate their first confession of faith. This was their attempt, which proved to be quite successful, to consolidate the many free-flowing groups within Anabaptism into a distinct movement. On February 24, 1527, the Anabaptists led by Sattler, produced the document entitled “Brotherly Union of a Number of Children of God Concerning Seven Articles,” more popularly known as the Schleitheim Confession of Faith. Leonard Gross expressed the importance of the Schleitheim Confession to the life and future of the Anabaptist movement when he wrote that it “gave substance to a movement which until then had largely been without form, a movement seemingly as varied as the individuals espousing the cause. Schleitheim brought structure and focus.” [50]

The Schleitheim Confession is made up of seven articles delineating the Anabaptists’ position on what would be considered more practical theology than doctrinal. However, it is thoroughly biblical in its orientation and standpoint. The seven articles discussed include:

1. Baptism; 
2. The Ban; [51] 
3. Breaking of Bread; [52] 
4. Separation from Abominations; 
5. Pastors in the Church; 
6. The Sword; and 
7. The Oath. [53] 

Although no mention is made in the Schleitheim Confession as to what the Anabaptists have in common with the main Reformed doctrines of the faith, one can infer that they had a basic agreement with them on issues such as the sole authority of the Scriptures, as well as salvation by grace alone through faith in Christ. John Yoder stated that the Schleitheim Confession “concentrated [only] upon these points on which the brothers differed from the rest of Protestantism,” calling it “a common man’s handbook on Anabaptist distinctives.” [54] He then goes on to cite Calvin’s understanding that these were only their distinctives and not the totality of their beliefs: “They included the sum of what they hold which is contrary to us and to the papists, in the seven articles.” [55] Williams agreed that the older view which said the Schleitheim Confession primarily was an attack on the Reformed faith is just not accurate. [56] Rather, Schleitheim assumes agreement with the main Reformation doctrines, only desiring to show their own distinctives to distance themselves from more radical and unbiblical aspects of the Anabaptist movement. Estep agreed:

The Schleitheim Confession was not intended to be a doctrinal formulation. There are no strictly theological concepts directly asserted in it.... The articles are in the nature of a church manual, such as the Didache of the second century. [57]

Whereas I agree with the modern conclusion, which states that the Schleitheim Confession does not deny the main Reformation doctrines, dealing rather with Anabaptist distinctives, I am still troubled about why nothing was said about common doctrinal ground with the Reformers. My theory is that they did not want to alienate the many different strands of the Anabaptists with their first confession, but focus rather on unity. [58] Clearly, the Schleitheim Confession bears the historical legacy of a kind of Christian unity based on exterior practice, rather than doctrinal accuracy. Sadly, this would open the door to legalists and heretics being able to affirm the Schleitheim Confession as their own. Thus, Schleitheim’s legacy is really more moralistic, rather than distinctly evangelical.

One final word should be made about the authorship of the Schleitheim Confession. It is universally accepted that Sattler was the primary author of the Schleitheim Confession, and there are no serious challenges to this tradition. The Strasbourg Reformers believed Sattler was the author in their first “Capito Letter,” [59] and in a letter written from fifty Swiss Brethren elders to Menno Simmons in 1555-1556, the Schleitheim Confession is referred to as “the agreement of Michael Sattler.” [60] Although there is no eyewitness account of this as true, the parallel phrases and writing style of Schleitheim seem to be clearly that of Sattler. Modern historians, however, are careful to say that the Schleitheim Confession was technically only “under the direction of” [61] and “mainly the work of” [62] Michael Sattler.

Sattler’s Trial And Martyrdom

While this article will not venture in detail into Sattler and his wife’s unjust trial and horrible execution, [63] many of his recorded statements will be later used in an effort to reconstruct his theological system. Sattler was captured in Horb, [64] along with his wife and some other followers, by the pro-catholic Austrian forces soon after the completion of the great Schleitheim conference in February 1527. His “show” trial and subsequent execution took place in the imperial city of Rottenburg on the Neckar River during May 1527. During his trial, Sattler refused a defense attorney, [65] choosing rather to simply and ably answer his accusers from the Bible, although he was harshly treated in response. [66] Sattler’s death truly was barbarous—having part of his tongue cut out and his flesh torn from his body multiple times with hot irons before being burnt to ashes. After their failure to obtain a recantation, Sattler’s wife was martyred by drowning eight days later. [67]

In considering Sattler’s execution for Christ’s sake, it will suffice to note that the dialogue recorded between Sattler and his accusers provides a portrait of a man who was reasonable, thoughtful, theological, and biblical in his answers and responses to his accusers. [68] His verbal defense is actually nothing more than series of biblical quotes, followed by a doctrinal conclusion. This shows that Sattler was not a raving mystic, but rather a biblical theologian. For example, Sattler wisely affirmed that Mary was truly blessed because of her honor of bearing the Savior of the world; nevertheless, he showed that Scriptures never regard her as “a mediatrix and advocatess.” [69] Sattler did not express his biblical beliefs as mere opinions or speculation, proving the sincerity of his Christian beliefs with his own blood and burnt flesh.

A Reconstruction Of Michael Sattler’s Theology

The focus now is to demonstrate that Sattler’s theology and practice lies somewhere between the Reformed position and medieval monasticism; however, he was certainly within the bounds of orthodox Christianity. Reconstructing a theological system of Michael Sattler does not include a full display of his beliefs, as would be more possible with Caspar Schwenckfeld or Menno Simmons. This is due to a lack of many extant writings of Sattler, since he was martyred at such a young age.

The best collection of Sattler’s works was translated, edited, and compiled together in 1973 by John H. Yoder. Yoder gave twelve different works [70] either written by, attributed to in tradition, or directly related to Sattler. For this reason, the title of his book is The Legacy of Michael Sattler, rather than “The Works of Michael Sattler.” In his own words, Yoder explained why he compiled all twelve of these works together:

The title we have chosen for the present collection, The Legacy of Michael Sattler, reflects the fact that, despite some possible serious doubts about the authorship of some of the texts, they nonetheless all spring from the movement of which Michael Sattler was a major architect and may worthily serve as to document the character of his movement. [71]

I will limit myself to those primary sources which are considered genuinely Sattler’s own work. This is not to say that Sattler’s theology is not somewhat reflected in all twelve of Yoder’s translated works, [72] but I prefer to deal with the known facts about Sattler’s beliefs. Thus, Sattler’s theology will be reconstructed from the following sources, which have strong historical support for authenticity: [73]

1. Michael Sattler—Parting with the Strasbourg Reformers.
2. Michael Sattler—The Schleitheim Brotherly Union.
3. Michael Sattler—Imprisonment: Letter to Horb.
4. Klaus von Graveneck—The Trial and Martyrdom of Michael Sattler.
5. Wolfgang Capito and Martin Bucer—The Capito Letters. [74]

The Doctrine Of Scripture

Earle Cairns wrote about the goal of Sattler and the other Anabaptists’ thinking: “They wanted to have a restitution, the return of the church to biblical purity and to Christ in true discipleship.” [75] It is this pursuit of purity in life and doctrine which all Bible believers can appreciate. Sattler’s desire for restitution to a pure church began with a high view of the Bible. He believed that the Bible was God’s Word and thus possessed the final authority on matters of faith and practice. Anyone examining Sattler’s writings will be refreshed by the numerous scriptural citations and paraphrases.

Sattler clearly held that both the Old and New Testaments were to be considered God’s authoritative Word. In his Schleitheim Confession, he purposely uses “God” interchangeably with “Scripture.” [76] Although he normally quoted Scripture without giving the exact reference, one can easily recognize his careful and repeated use of biblical wording. For example, Sattler quoted from a large section of Titus 2 in the cover letter to the Schleitheim Confession, [77] making reference often to the “rule of Paul,” which seems to be a favorite thought with Sattler. [78] In his prison letter to Horb, Sattler encouraged the Christians by citing what he called “the testimony of Paul,” before quoting the larger section of 1 Corinthians 13. [79] In closing this same letter to Horb, Sattler authoritatively charged the brethren to obey “what I point to with such Scripture and live accordingly.” [80] In his works, Sattler made specific references to the books of Psalms, Matthew, Romans, Corinthians, Ephesians, 1 Timothy, Titus, James, and 1 Peter. [81] Yoder pointed out that in Sattler’s parting letter with the Strasbourg Reformers, his “twenty theses are all direct New Testament quotations or allusions.” [82]

For Sattler, then, the Scripture was the final authority which a Christian may appeal to for justification for his beliefs. His reliance on the sole authority of the Old and New Testaments can possibly best be seen when his very life was at stake. During Sattler’s “mock trial” before his execution, he was allowed one last opportunity to defend himself against the nine charges brought against him by the magistrates. Sattler’s answers constitute an example for believers of all time on how to graciously answer all accusations by appealing to the simple authority of God’s Word. His answers include appeals to “the Gospel and the Word of God,” the “Scripture,” what is “written,” “the command of God,” “the Holy Scripture,” as well as specific references given from numerous books of the Bible. [83] Each of Sattler’s answers to the nine charges against him were firmly based on the authority of God’s Word alone. Sattler’s confidence in God’s Word led him to be a bold proclaimer of the divine truth, even when his life was at stake. [84]

In his trial then, he not only showed himself to be a biblicist in his approach to God’s Word, but he was a well-reasoned, gifted systematic theologian. For example, when answering the charge that he had “rejected the sacrament of unction,” Sattler wisely answers based on Scripture:

We have not rejected oil, for it is a creature of God. What God has made is good and not to be rejected. But what pope, bishop, monk, and priests have wanted to do is improve on it, this we thinking nothing of. For the pope has never made anything good. What the epistle of James speaks of is not the pope’s oil. [85]

Here he shows himself to be confident in comparing Scripture with Scripture and giving confident theological conclusions derived from reasoning from the text of God’s Word itself. This same type of biblical confidence is also seen in the Schleitheim cover letter, where he weaves together one doctrinal concept after another. [86]

Finally, Sattler wisely sought to correct the weaknesses of some of the Anabaptists’ views of Scripture. Sattler was well aware that some Anabaptists were more speculative than biblical in their understanding of God’s revelation. To his credit, he denounced these plainly in his letter to Horb:

Some brothers, I know who they are, have fallen short of this love. They have not wanted to build up one another in love, but are puffed up and have become useless in vain speculation and understanding of those things which God wants to keep secret. I do not admonish or reject the grace and revelation of God, but the inflated use of this revelation. [87]

Far from taking a low or mystical approach to God’s Word, Sattler was almost overly literal in his interpretations of Scripture, failing to compare Scripture with Scripture at times. Hans Jurgen-Goertz even asserted that “Michael Sattler marked the switch to a legalistic interpretation of Scripture among the Swiss Brethren.” [88] For example, in his Schleitheim Confession, he took great pains to explain why all swearing of oaths is absolutely forbidden, and why it is never right for a Christian to be a magistrate or take up arms, but he seems to suffer from proof-texting on these points without carefully bringing in all the various passages to bear on these matters.

Besides his overly literal interpretation of Scripture at times, Sattler was also a product of his time by his appeal to the Apocrypha. In his letter to Horb, Sattler wrote, “I hope his entire body will soon no longer be, as stands written in 4 Esdras 11.” [89] Then again, in the close of the same letter, Sattler cited a large section from Esdras again. Whether Sattler felt that the Apocrypha held the same authority as the canonical books is not known, but he definitely regarded it with esteem. However, in his overall approach toward Scripture, Sattler can be viewed as a careful theological student who strongly emphasized Scripture as authoritative.

The Doctrine Of God

Although some Anabaptists maintained Arian views of Christ and denied the doctrine of the Trinity, this was certainly not the case with Sattler. He believed that God eternally exists as one in essence but as three consubstantial, uncreated, equally divine Persons. In his “Parting with the Strasbourg Reformers,” Sattler distinguished between the three Persons of the Godhead, yet treated each member as essentially God. [90] Following the apostolic example of Paul, Sattler began both his “Letter to Horb” as well as the Schleit­heim Confession with a Trinitarian blessing: “May joy, peace, [and] mercy from our Father, through the atonement of the blood of Jesus Christ, together with the gifts of the Spirit...[give you] strength and consolation...until the end.” [91]

Having received training in the Patristics during his time as a Benedictine monk, Sattler was familiar with the orthodox conclusion and formula of Nicene. In his letter to Horb, Sattler closed with a beautiful Trinitarian benediction:

May the peace of Jesus Christ and the love of the heavenly Father, and the grace of the Spirit keep you flawless, without sin, and present you joyous and pure before the vision of Their holiness at the coming of our Lord Jesus Christ, that you might be found among the number of the called ones at the supper of the one-essential true God and Savior. [92]

Yoder explained that the term “one-essential” is the German eingewesen, which was the translation for homoousios, “the Nicene term for the identity of essence of the Son with the Father.” [93] Thomas Finger also believed that Sattler not only understood the issues and terminology of the early Trinitarian councils, but was “perhaps reflecting the Western filioque [clause].” [94] Either way, Sattler held to a historic orthodox view of the substance and persons of the Godhead.

Sattler also believed that the Triune God directs all things for the end of “His glory.” [95] This glorification of His own Person is accomplished through His divine decree. Yet far from being impersonal, God’s decree foreknows, chooses, and calls individual believers out of this world. [96] And thus, God’s “counsel is immutable.” [97] In his “Letter to Horb,” Sattler encouraged the brethren by writing, “The elect servants...will be marked on their forehead with the name of their Father.” [98] Sattler practically saw God’s sovereignty working out in the life of believers like a Father who chastens His own children for their ultimate good, “drawn according to the will of the Father” in all perfect wisdom and divine planning. [99] Sattler’s confidence in God’s paternal love, combined with a reliance on His eternal decree, led him to boldly declare before his execution: “What God wills, that will come to pass.” [100] Finally, while having a sure trust in God’s providential control, Sattler recognized that God allows difficult, hard-to-explain events to occur in a believer’s life. In these difficult things, Sattler counseled, “If you love God, you will rejoice in the truth and will believe, hope and endure everything that comes from God.” [101]

In reference to God’s character, Sattler recognized both the incommunicable and communicable attributes of God. Sattler viewed God as righteous, immutable, eternal, and almighty. [102] God is also good and “grace is in Him alone,” as Sattler testified to those who would execute him. [103] Sattler knew that man left to his own sin apart from Christ would be damned under God’s wrath. [104] Man’s hope was only to be found in God’s graciousness and merciful nature. [105]

The Doctrines Of Man And Sin

While Sattler was clear that all mankind needs saving through Christ and is naturally under the lordship of Satan to do his will, [106] he never spent time clarifying a doctrine of total depravity. We only see from his writings that man needs forgiveness for his “shortcomings and guilt,” [107] and that this redemption comes only through God’s grace expressed in the blood work of Christ.

It does seem, however, that Sattler viewed man after salvation as having a great measure of ability to keep God’s Word in a pure manner. Citing Esdras, Sattler spoke of believers as having “fulfilled the Law of the Lord.” [108] This may possibly suggest that Sattler believed in the semi-perfectibility of the Christian man, although not enough has been written by him on this matter to make a definite conclusion. Sattler’s doctrines of man and sin then are largely unknown, which have allowed subsequent generations of Anabaptists to have an overly optimistic view of mankind and his possible perfectibility.

The Doctrine Of Christ’s Person

As already seen above, Sattler affirmed the biblical and historic Nicene Creed and doctrine of the Trinity. Thus, Christ is divine, possessing all those attributes of God Himself. But more than this, Sattler’s theology is Christ-centered rather than church- or sacrament-centered. While defending his position on Mary and the saints at his trial in Rottenburg, Sattler affirmed that only “Christ is our mediator and advocate with God.” [109] Although given opportunity to lay some credit to the person of Mary in order to possibly save his own life, Sattler made a good profession of salvation through the person of Christ alone. Further, he believed that the real body of Christ could not be present in the sacrament, because the resurrected Christ Jesus has “ascended into heaven and sitteth on the right hand of his Heavenly Father, whence he shall come to judge the quick and the dead.” [110]

Sattler presented Christ as the Head of the Church [111] and the true Shepherd of men’s souls. [112] Thus, the members of the church have but one allegiance and loyalty—Jesus Christ—for it is only “faith in Jesus Christ [which] reconciles us with the Father and gives us access to Him.” [113] Further, the members of His body ought to strive to be “as the Head” in all their behavior and seek to be “conformed to the image of Christ.” [114] Starkly contrasting his presentation of Satan as the prince of this world, Christ is gloriously displayed as the “Prince of the Spirit, in whom all who walk in the light live.” [115] Not only, though, is Christ “Prince of the Spirit,” but He was also set forth by Sattler as “the Prince of our faith and its Perfecter.” [116] Thus, Sattler held to an orthodox, biblical view of Christ, presenting Him as the all-sufficient Savior and Head of the Church.

The Doctrine Of Christ’s Redemptive Work

Sattler’s view of Christ’s redemptive work can be summarized by his first proposition in his work, “Parting with the Strasbourg Reformers”: “Christ came to save all those who would believe in Him alone.” [117] As such, in contrast to the Reformers, Sattler held to a general view of Christ’s atonement. But although he was not as Reformed in his teachings on the work of Christ, Thomas Finger credited Sattler with doing something that many of the Swiss Brethren, other than Balthasar Hubmaier, failed to do—explicitly affirm that Christ is the only one who can reconcile sinners with and grant access to the Father. [118] Sattler taught that Satan actively seeks to destroy mankind, while Christ actively “seeks to save” mankind. [119]

In regard to Christ’s reconciliation with man, Sattler believed that the ground of man’s salvation was His blood atonement. The importance of the blood atonement to Sattler can be seen by making an appeal to it in the opening words of the cover letter to the Schleitheim Confession, writing, “May joy, peace, mercy from our Father, through the atonement of the blood of Christ Jesus...[give] strength and consolation and constance in all tribulation to the end.” [120] And far from Christ providing His blood atonement out of constraint or because of man’s worth, Sattler noted that the reason for this work of God is His mercy alone—a gift of His grace. [121]

Further, he believed that the efficacy of Christ’s atonement is always received through the means of a repentant faith. While testifying at his trial, Sattler explained that the reason that he was being persecuted was because he was continuing “in our faith in Christ.” [122] Although in his letter “Parting with the Strasbourg Reformers,” he wrote that “he who believes and is baptized will be saved,” it is unlikely that he was seeking to imply baptismal regeneration but is simply quoting from Mark 16:15 without comment. [123] For Sattler, Christ’s blood-bought salvation was received through “believing prayer” and by “those truly who believe that their sins are taken away through Christ.” [124] Yet far from being a dead faith, true saving faith is that which is accompanied with “knowledge unto repentance” and “unto all those who have been taught repentance and the amendment of life.” [125]

Sattler believed the result of the gift of Christ’s atonement received by faith was “to redeem us from all unrighteousness and to purify unto himself a people of his own, who would be zealous for good works.” [126] His redemption included wiping away one’s “shortcomings and guilt, through the gracious forgiveness of God and through the blood of Jesus Christ.” [127]

Commenting on Sattler’s theology of Christ’s redemption in his Schleitheim Confession, Thomas Finger wrote, “To Christ’s blood Schleitheim attributed forgiveness.” [128] To Sattler, the believer receives not only forgiveness through faith in Christ’s atonement, but a positional holiness and righteousness of Christ. [129] Forgiveness was only the first part of Christ’s redemption of the believer’s life. His atoning work also sanctifies or makes one “freed...from the servitude of the flesh and fitted...for the service of God and the Spirit whom He has given us.” [130]

The Doctrine Of Sanctification

In approaching Sattler’s doctrine of sanctification, it is important to understand that this doctrine was of particular interest and importance to him. For Sattler, purity realized in the life of the believer and church was paramount to one’s Christian experience. Anabaptist scholar C. Arnold Snyder explains that Sattler had such a high view of maintaining purity in the church through the use of the ban because of his “very optimistic view of the power of regeneration by the Spirit of God.” [131] His stress of personal and church purity can certainly be appreciated by God’s people, yet we find in Sattler emphasis on the sanctifying effects of regeneration without an equal emphasis on justification by faith. Sattler’s fear was that the Reformed and Lutheran doctrine of justification by faith would lead to a kind of antinomianism, so he reacted or possibly overreacted against it. In the introduction to the Schleitheim Confession, Sattler warned of “a very great offense...introduced by several false brethren among us.” [132] Sattler then explained that the “great offense” was believers who said that “they have esteemed that faith and love may do and permit everything and that nothing can harm nor condemn them.” [13]3 It seemed as if the “false brethren” to whom Sattler referred were those professing believers who use the doctrine of justification by faith alone to excuse their ungodly lifestyle. Because of this antinomian abuse by the “false brethren,” Sattler simply decided to focus more on regeneration and its sanctifying effects instead, rather than on justification. Verduin wrote that Sattler believed that the Reformers “throw works without faith so far to one side that they erect a faith without works.” [134] Sattler’s failure to stress both the positional truth of justification, along with the experiential realization of regeneration, produced an unfortunate legacy of imbalance in Anabaptism to neglect the great Reformation doctrine of justification by faith. It is not that Sattler rejected justification as false doctrine; he simply hesitated to teach it in all its glory for fear of those who would twist it to their own end. The result of this imbalance in emphasis, combined with Sattler’s under-development of the doctrine of total depravity, certainly tended toward perfectionism.

With this criticism in mind, Sattler developed a quite detailed expression of sanctification, which he apparently practiced personally and sought to apply among the Anabaptists. Sattler viewed sanctification as that which was already accomplished positionally in a believer’s life “through Christ’s blood”; yet he still needed to responsibly continue to sanctify himself. [135] Sanctification, then, was a process of the believer being separated from every sin, [136] which was always accomplished in the context of conflict between the flesh and the spirit. [137]

Sattler taught that believers continue their lifelong process of sanctification by resisting the carnal promptings and by crucifying “their flesh with all its lusts and desires.” [138] He stressed to his congregation the need to “watch and pray” [139] and “to stand fast in the Lord as obedient children of God...to persevere along the path we have entered upon, unto the glory of God and of Christ His Son.” [140] Probably reflecting his earlier time as a monastic, Sattler’s view of sanctification was one of extreme personal discipline, yet he moderated this rigidity by also stressing the necessity of love as the basis for pursuing personal or corporate purity. Writing to his congregation at Horb, Sattler admonished, “But if you will love the neighbor, you will not scold or ban zealously…[and be] humble and sympathetic with the weak and imperfect.” [141] Just as God the Father lovingly chastens and disciplines His children for their sanctification, so we are to love one another in our discipline of each other. [142]

For Sattler, the goal of sanctification was for believers to have the mind of Christ, being conformed to the very image of Christ. [143] Sattler wrote that “they are the true Christians who practice in deed the teaching of Christ.” [144] For him, when those who have “fully yielded and have placed their trust in their Father in heaven,” they will in no way turn to physical warfare, even in self-protection. [145] So, for Sattler, sanctification was intricately intertwined with following Christ’s example. This is why the Strasbourg Reformers felt that Sattler was introducing a new monasticism, which focused excessively on legalistic obedience rather than a personal holiness in response to God’s free redemption and justifying grace.

The Doctrine Of Separation

Although intricately related to his doctrine of sanctification, Sattler’s extensive treatment of the believer’s separation from the world requires a separate point of explanation. For Sattler, separation from the world was more than a separation from the rebellious spirit of the age; it meant a separation from the normal aspects of civil government and society. I would like to set forth three propositions about Sattler’s incorrect view of the doctrine of the Christian’s separation.

First, Sattler’s understanding of separation from the world seems to be grounded on a misunderstanding of the term “world” itself, coupled with a failure to appreciate common grace. Sattler apparently either rejected or did not understand common grace, writing that “since all who have not entered into the obedience of faith...are a great abomination before God, therefore nothing else can or really will grow or spring forth from them other than abomination.” [146] Lacking a well-defined doctrine of total depravity, he did not take into account that man’s moral pollution has not necessarily affected every aspect of his being equally. Sattler could not understand how a person without the Holy Spirit could still be appreciated for his mathematical genius because, to him, he is “nothing but an abomination which we should shun.” [147]

A number of Sattler’s propositions justifying his departure from Strasbourg also indicate that Sattler was confused in his definition of the world. Rather than distinguishing between the various uses of the term “world,” Sattler seemed to include all aspects of the world as evil. [148] This would include the “world” as meaning “the world of humanity,” “the world of material creation,” and “the world as an organized spirit of rebellion.” Simply put, Sattler misunderstood that to separate from the world meant to separate from “worldliness” or the evil spirit of the age and not the neutral aspects of the material world or fellow humans in general. For Sattler, then, things were very black and white: since “the citizenship of Christians is in heaven and not on earth,” then a Christian man has no civic responsibility, nor is he even allowed to participate in civil dealings. [149] This is because “the devil is the prince over the whole world,” which would include the material world, lost people, and its evil practices. [150]

Second, Sattler’s wrong view of separation required that the world must be as pure as the church if he were to have any social dealings with it. Sattler couldn’t understand how one could be a citizen of heaven, yet at the same time a loyal citizen of an earthly country. [151] It seems as if Sattler could not comprehend Paul’s explanation in 1 Corinthians 5 that Christians are allowed to associate with people of the world, just not with disobedient professing believers.

Third, Sattler’s hyper-separatistic views led him to allow no place for the Christian to serve in civil government or military service. Although Sattler understood that the civil governments had been established by God and are as such “ministers of God,” [152] he never participated in civil government, going so far as saying that a Christian who is a magistrate is one who walks in darkness. [153] His Schleitheim Confession bluntly charges “that it does not befit a Christian to be a magistrate: the rule of the government is according to the flesh, that of a Christian according to the spirit.” [154] Thus, for the magisterial Reformers, like Zwingli, attempting to use the civil magistrate to enact religious reform was a syncretistic abomination for Sattler. Writing of Sattler’s view, Snyder said, “Christians are no more to participate in the governmental order than they are to participate in any other [evil] works of the kingdom of darkness.” [155] This would certainly include taking up the sword in a battle against the Turks, which was one of the reasons cited for Sattler’s execution. [156] It is because of Sattler’s rigid separation from civil government that, after his execution, the Strasbourg Reformers wrote to his imprisoned followers and sought to help them understand that God actually calls some believers into civil service. They argue that “a Christian can be [both] an overlord [civil servant] and can serve God in his command.” [157] Unfortunately, these theological weaknesses of Sattler have been largely inherited by modern Anabaptists.

The Doctrines Of The Church And Sacraments

Although one is unable to definitively attribute the authorship of a small work entitled “Congregational Order” to Sattler’s pen, it does accurately reflect his understanding that the visible church is an organized institution for worship, service, and accountability. [158] Sattler’s desire for a more formal and organized church structure was actually one of the reasons for his leadership at the Schleitheim Conference. As was noted earlier, this conference largely dealt with practical matters among the Anabaptist brethren. Sattler made it clear that he expected his own congregation to hold to the Schleitheim Articles in a “strict” fashion, [159] in order that they may discern false teachers. [160] If those in the congregation did not follow that which was agreed upon, then they would be subject to the ban or face formal church discipline. [161] The church leader who was to maintain purity in the church is the pastor or shepherd, who

shall be to read and exhort and teach, warn, admonish, or ban in the congregation, and properly to preside among the sisters and brothers in prayer, and in the breaking of bread, and in all things to take care of the body of Christ, that it may be built up and developed, so that the name of God might be praised and honored through us and the mouth of the mocker be stopped. [162]

One final word should be said about Sattler’s view of the two ordinances of the church: believers’ baptism and the Lord’s Table. First, Sattler was crystal clear that the ordinance of the Lord’s Table or the breaking of bread has no efficacious effect. He seemed to hold to the simple memorial or “remembrance view” of Zwingli. [163] Sattler’s requirements for partaking of the Lord’s Table included those who have experienced water baptism, writing that “they must beforehand be united in the one body of Christ, that is the congregation of God, whose head is Christ, and that by baptism.” [164]

This last statement brings up a debate about Sattler’s view of water baptism. Like almost all Anabaptists, Sattler believed that water baptism was to be alone reserved for those who have personally decided to follow Christ in faith. Although it is clear that Sattler is opposed to infant baptism, [165] some have felt that he believed that baptism was necessary to gain entrance not only into the visible church, but also into the invisible church. The Strasbourg Reformers were actually not sure what Sattler believed on this point—whether baptism was necessary for salvation or not. However, the Schleitheim Confession solved the mystery by clearly stating that those will only be baptized “who have been taught repentance...and [who] truly believe that their sins are taken away through Christ.” [166] Thus Sattler’s view of the church and the ordinances are similar to many modern independent, baptistic churches.

The Doctrines Of The End Times And Satan

Michael Sattler’s willingness to be temporarily tortured and unjustly executed for the doctrines of God’s Word reflected his personal belief that he was living for another time—for eternity. Sattler knew all too well that “he who does not believe will be damned” and “those who are carnal belong to death and to the wrath of God.” [167] Just as there is a literal hell with which to reckon, so there was a literal devil who is “prince over the whole world” and who “seeks to destroy” mankind’s soul. [168] Likewise, he knew that there is a wonderful Savior seeking to save lost men and woman and destroy the works of the devil. Thus, Sattler lived his life knowing that there is a reward in store for all true believers in Christ and that his eternal destiny “is in heaven and not on the earth.” [169]

Sattler revealed his views of eschatology in his “Imprisonment: Letter to Horb.” This letter was written in the midst of great persecution, with the understanding that he was near the end of his life. This letter was his final words of farewell to the brethren in the town where he labored so earnestly for Christ. In this context Sattler revealed that he believed that the end of the world was at hand, Christ’s coming was imminent, and that the eschatological day of the Lord “must no longer tarry.” [170] Like many persecuted believers throughout the centuries suggested, he felt that the abomination of desolations mentioned in Daniel and Thessalonians was taking place in his day. He wrote to the brethren at Horb:

The time of threshing has come near. The abomination of desolation is visible among you. The elect servants and maidservants of God will be marked on the forehead with the name of their Father. The world has arisen against those who are redeemed from its error. The gospel is testified to before all the world for a testimony. According to this the day of the Lord must no longer tarry. [171]

Based on his understanding that “the day of the Lord draws nearer,” Sattler encouraged the brethren to greater united prayer, fellowship, and holiness in light of the imminent return of the Lord. Sattler closed his letter by quoting a large eschatological passage from the apocryphal book of 4 Esdras 2:34-37, which uses flowery apocalyptic language.

Although Sattler did not have time to develop his eschatology fully, it is clear that he believed in a literal and imminent return of the Lord in order to judge the wicked and consign them to hell fire, as well as a literal and heavenly reward for believers. The sense of his writings is that he had a futuristic view of the fulfillment of apocalyptic sections of God’s Word, and that these future prophecies were beginning to find fulfillment in his own day.

Concluding Lessons From Michael Sattler’s Theology

This paper has been burdened to show that, though not Reformed, Sattler was theologically within broad biblical convictions. His theology and practice indicated a man who was a thorough-going biblicist in his convictions, yet having been greatly colored by the extreme separatism of medieval monasticism. Coupled with this was his overreaction against the Reformed theology of Zwingli, Bucer, and Capito. Those who knew Sattler found him to be a warm-hearted, evangelical, fervent Christian pastor and theologian, undoubtedly part of that number spoken of in Hebrews 11:38: “of whom the world was not worthy.”

The benefit of the modern historian is the opportunity to learn both positive and negative lessons from the lives of those saints who have gone before us.

How To Suffer According To God’s Will

First, Michael Sattler teaches us how to suffer graciously, uncompromisingly, and according to God’s will. At Sattler’s trial and martyrdom, it became apparent that he knew and practiced the teachings of 1 Peter with all the graciousness of a Spirit-empowered child of God. Any believer going through persecution for his faith would do well to learn from his godly example. Sattler teaches us how to rightly suffer and die for Christ. In all four accounts of his martyrdom, although Sattler skillfully used the sword of the Spirit, God’s Word, with precision and clarity, one never found him using bitter language against his adversaries. Whereas one may disagree with his radical pacifistic approach to life, he certainly practiced what he preached. The Anabaptists lost a bright, young leader when Sattler was unjustly executed, but they found in him an example of godliness under great trials.

Balancing Separation From Worldliness With Life In The World

Second, Michael Sattler teaches us the need to maintain a balance between separating from worldliness while maintaining a proper relationship with the world. It is clear Sattler was confused about what it meant to be in the world but not of it. As society grew darker, Sattler tended to become hyper-separatistic in his stance to the world and human government, going beyond rejecting evil in the world to rejecting some aspects of the world that God created for mankind to freely enjoy. Sattler’s brand of separation kept him from fully becoming the salt and light that God would have him to be.

Don’t Sacrifice the Doctrinal on the Altar of the Practical

Finally, Michael Sattler teaches us about the need to maintain an emphasis on the key doctrines of the Christian faith, even when tempted to deal with more pressing, practical issues. Sattler’s theology brings the question of priority before our eyes. Certainly, there are many important practical matters for the church to deal with today, but we must never sacrifice doctrine on the altar of the practical. Sattler’s Schleitheim Confession was so taken up with practical matters of their Anabaptist distinctions that no mention was ever made of more important matters such as total depravity, justification by faith, imputation, and the like. As did the post-apostolic church fathers, Saddler needed more emphasis on salvation’s doctrines of grace to balance out his moralistic strain. Because of Sattler’s failure to emphasize doctrines like justification by faith in his teaching, the Anabaptists ultimately restored more of a post-apostolic church with its moralistic strain and doctrinal confusion, than restoring the doctrinal emphasis of the apostolic church.

The sad conclusion to Sattler’s theology is that, in all his writings, there is no clear explanation of the gospel. This holds a warning for all of us. Many of the various aspects of the gospel are present in the writings of Sattler, but the gospel takes a back seat to his practical concerns. His low view of depravity, coupled with a diminishing view of justification, opened him up to a perfectionistic view of Christian life. Regardless of one’s perceived need to deal with more practical issues in the church, we must never fall prey to the temptation to major on moralism at the expense of proclaiming the primary doctrines of Christ, redemption, grace, and salvation.

Notes

1. See Joel Kaufmann and Darryl Wimberley, The Radicals, DVD, directed by Raul V. Carrera [Worcester, Pa.: Vision Video, 1990].
2. John H. Yoder, trans. and ed., The Legacy of Michael Sattler (Scottdale, Pa.: Herald Press, 1973), 10.
3. Angel M. Mergal and George H. Williams, trans. and eds., Spiritual and Anabaptist Writers: Documents Illustrative of the Radical Reformation (Philadelphia: Westminster Press, 1957), 136.
4. Yoder, Legacy, 7.
5. C. Arnold Snyder, “Life of Michael Sattler Reconsidered,” Mennonite Quarterly Review 52 (1978): 328-32. For more bibliographical information on Sattler’s life, see C. Arnold Snyder, The Life and Thought of Michael Sattler (Scottdale, Pa.: Herald Press, 1984).
6. Snyder, “Sattler Reconsidered,” 329.
7. Consult Charles S. Anderson, Augsburg Historical Atlas of Christianity in the Middle Ages and Reformation (Minneapolis: Augsburg Publishing House, 1967), 42-43.
8. “His name is not on the matriculation lists of the University of Freiberg; nevertheless, it is possible that as a monk,...he attended lectures,” so says Gustav Bossert, Jr., Harold S. Bender, and C. Arnold Snyder, “Sattler, Michael (d. 1527)” in Global Anabaptist Mennonite Encyclopedia Online (GAMEO), 1989, http://gameo.org/ encyclopedia/contents/S280.html [accessed November 2, 2010].
9. Thomas N. Finger, A Contemporary Anabaptist Theology: Biblical, Historical, Constructive (Downers Grove, Ill.: InterVarsity Press, 2004), 423-24.
10. Mergal, Anabaptist Writers, 136.
11. Snyder, “Sattler Reconsidered,” 330.
12. Snyder, “Sattler Reconsidered,” 330.
13. William R. Estep, The Anabaptist Story: An Introduction to Sixteenth-Century Anabaptism, 3rd ed. (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1996), 58.
14. Estep, The Anabaptist Story, 60.
15. Sattler, “Martyrdom,” in Yoder, Legacy, 72.
16. Snyder, “Sattler Reconsidered,” 330-31.
17. Snyder, “Sattler Reconsidered,” 331.
18. Leland Harder, ed., The Sources of Swiss Anabaptism: The Grebel Letters and Related Documents (Scottdale, Pa.: Herald Press, 1985), 563.
19. Bossert, GAMEO, 1.
20. Mergal, Anabaptist Writers, 136.
21. Timothy George, The Theology of the Reformers (Nashville: Broadman Press, 1988), 113.
22. Bossert, GAMEO, 1.
23. See Estep, Anabaptist Story, 61. “His personal contacts with Grebel, Mantz, and Blaurock...gave him ample opportunity to observe the nature of the [Anabaptist] movement and its varied expressions in Switzerland and southwest Germany.”
24. Harder, Sources, 563.
25. The Anbaptists called Strasbourg “the city of hope” and “the refuge of righteousness.” Cf. George Hunston Williams, The Radical Reformation (Philadelphia: Westminster Press, 1962), 159.
26. Mergal, Anabaptist Writers, 18.
27. Mergal, Anabaptist Writers, 18.
28. Estep, Anabaptist Story, 62.
29. Estep, Anabaptist Story, 62. Here Estep is citing a letter from Capito to Zwingli, following Hans Denck’s expulsion from the city.
30. See Sattler, “Parting with the Strasbourg Reformers,” in Yoder, Legacy, 21. The letter begins, “Michael Sattler to his beloved brothers in God Capito and Bucer and other who love and confess Christ from the heart.”
31. Sattler, “Parting with the Strasbourg Reformers,” in Yoder, Legacy, 23. Sattler felt that heretics should be addressed by the church through the ban or excommunication.
32. Capito, “The Capito Letters,” in Yoder, Legacy, 88.
33. Capito, “The Capito Letters,” in Yoder, Legacy, 92.
34. Capito, “The Capito Letters,” in Yoder, Legacy, 97.
35. Capito, “A Faithful Warning,” in Yoder, Legacy, 19.
36. Capito, “The Capito Letters,” in Yoder, Legacy, 87.
37. Capito, “The Capito Letters,” in Yoder, Legacy, 87.
38. “A friendly way” was with patient Christian instruction, not by the executioner’s sword.
39. Capito, “The Capito Letters,” in Yoder, Legacy, 91-92.
40. Capito, “The Capito Letters,” in Yoder, Legacy, 92.
41. Capito, “The Capito Letters,” in Yoder, Legacy, 90.
42. Williams, Radical Reformation, 187.
43. Leonard Verduin, The Reformers and Their Stepchildren (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1964), 105.
44. Capito, “The Capito Letters,” in Yoder, Legacy, 87.
45. Finger, Anabaptist Theology, 22.
46. Williams, Radical Reformation, 187.
47. Hans Jurgen-Goertz, The Anabaptists, trans. Trevor Johnson (New York: Routledge, 1996), 14.
48. Felix Mantz was the first Anabaptist martyr at the hands of Protestants, being killed in Zurich on January 5, 1527.
49. Yoder, Legacy, 29.
50. Leonard Gross, “Introduction,” in The Schleitheim Confession, trans. and ed. John H. Yoder (Scottdale, Pa.: Herald Press, 1973), 3-4.
51. This is church discipline or excommunication.
52. This is the Lord’s Table or Communion.
53. See William L. Lumpkin, Baptist Confessions of Faith, revised ed. (Valley Forge: Judson Press, 1969), 25.
54. Yoder, Legacy, 31.
55. John Calvin, Brieve Instruction, quoted in Yoder, Legacy, 44-45.
56. Williams, Radical Reformation, 182. This is contrary to the view of church historian Kenneth Scott Latourette, A History of Christianity: Reformation to the Present, vol. 2 (reprint of 1975 ed., Peabody, Mass.: Price Press, 1999), 782. Williams continues on p. 185: “The Schleitheim Confession was far from being a balanced testimony of the faith and practice of the Swiss Brethren. It was, rather, like most synodal utterances, shaped by the immediate concerns of the movement to disavow excesses and aberrations from within and to resist challenges from without.”
57. Estep, Anabaptist Story, 65.
58. Thus, the Schleitheim Confession may have actually allowed some heretical Anabaptists who disagreed with the core essential Christian beliefs to join in fellowship with orthodox Anabaptists.
59. Wolfgang Capito, “The Capito Letters: Letter to Burgermeister and Council at Horb,” in Yoder, Legacy, 87.
60. Lumpkin, Baptist Confessions, 23.
61. Frank Hamlin Littell, The Anabaptist View of the Church: A Study in the Origins of Sectarian Protestantism, 2nd ed. (Boston: Starr King Press, 1958), 188.
62. Earle E. Cairns, Christianity Through the Centuries: A History of the Christian Church, 3rd ed. (Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 1996), 299.
63. There are actually four extant accounts of Sattler’s trial and subsequent martyrdom. This paper will reference the compiled and edited account in Mergal, Anabaptist Writers, 136-44.
64. Mergal, Anabaptist Writers, 136, says: “Sattler made the upper Hohenberg region of Wurtemburg his missionary field with Horb as his headquarters.”
65. Williams, Radical Reformation, 186.
66. When Sattler said that he would be open to changing his views if he received instruction from God’s Word, the town clerk answered: “The hangman will dispute with you.” The town clerk continued to use the harshest language with Sattler: “It were well if you had never been born.... If there were not a hangman here, I would hang you myself and be doing God a good service” (Mergal, Anabaptist Writers, 142). Sattler only continued to appeal to Scriptures with no harsh words for his unjust persecutors and false accusers.
67. Mergal, Anabaptist Writers, 144.
68. It should also be noted that Sattler did not share total disdain or rejection for the governmental authorities which were accusing him, referring to them often as “ministers of God” and remaining respectful of them, even when he had to disagree with them for sake of loyalty to God’s Word (see Mergal, Anabaptist Writers, 141-42).
69. Mergal, Anabaptist Writers, 140. Sattler then continues to quote from specific verses in Romans, Corinthians, Ephesians, and other places that all true Christians are saints, not just Mary and those pronounced saints by the Roman Catholic Church.
70. This number would increase to thirteen or fourteen if we include a hymn and the short work entitled “Congregational order,” which was attached to an early circulation of the Schleitheim Confession. However, there is no definitive evidence that Sattler was its author.
71. Yoder, Legacy, 100-101.
72. For example, one of the late John Yoder’s former students, Dr. Myron S. Augsburger, who himself went on to become a Sattler scholar, told me he felt that the spurious works “On the Satisfaction of Christ” and “On Two Kinds of Obedience” did reflect Sattler’s mediating position between Reformed and monastic soteriology.
73. See Yoder, Legacy, for this, as he provides both internal and external textual evidence in his footnotes, as well as his introductions to each translated work.
74. This includes two letters—one to the city council of Horb and one to the still-imprisoned Christian followers of Sattler.
75. Cairns, Christianity Through the Centuries, 299.
76. Sattler, “The Schleitheim Brotherly Union,” in Yoder, Legacy, 41.
77. Sattler, “The Schleitheim Brotherly Union,” in Yoder, Legacy, 43.
78. Sattler, “The Schleitheim Brotherly Union,” in Yoder, Legacy, 39.
79. Sattler, “Imprisonment: Letter to Horb,” in Yoder, Legacy, 59.
80. Sattler, “Imprisonment: Letter to Horb,” in Yoder, Legacy, 63.
81. See Sattler, “Parting with the Strasbourg Reformers,” in Yoder, Legacy, 22; Sattler, “The Schleitheim Brotherly Union,” in Yoder, Legacy, 42-44; Sattler quoted in “Martyrdom of Michael Sattler,” in Mergal, Anabaptist Writers, 71-72.
82. Sattler, “Parting with the Strasbourg Reformers,” in Yoder, Legacy, 21.
83. Sattler, quoted in “Martyrdom of Michael Sattler,” in Mergal, Anabaptist Writers, 139-41.
84. Note Mergal, Anabaptist Writers, 141, where he calls the magistrates “Turks according to the Spirit,” for their religious hypocrisy.
85. Mergal, Anabaptist Writers, 139-40.
86. Sattler, “The Schleitheim Brotherly Union,” in Yoder, Legacy, 34-36.
87. Sattler, “Imprisonment: Letter to Horb,” in Yoder, Legacy, 59-60.
88. Jurgen-Goertz, Anabaptists, 50.
89. Sattler, “Imprisonment: Letter to Horb,” in Yoder, Legacy, 56.
90. Sattler, “Parting with the Strasbourg Reformers,” in Yoder, Legacy, 22-23.
91. Sattler, “The Schleitheim Brotherly Union,” in Yoder, Legacy, 34. See also Sattler, “Imprisonment: Letter to Horb,” in Yoder, Legacy, 56.
92. Sattler, “Imprisonment: Letter to Horb,” in Yoder, Legacy, 63.
93. Sattler, “Imprisonment: Letter to Horb,” in Yoder, Legacy, 65.
94. Finger, Anabaptist Theology, 423. The filioque clause of the Western Church held that the Spirit proceeds from both the Father and the Son. This was in contrast to the Orthodox Church, which held that the Spirit proceeds from the Father alone.
95. Sattler, “The Schleitheim Brotherly Union,” in Yoder, Legacy, 35.
96. Sattler, “Parting with Strasbourg Reformers,” in Yoder, Legacy, 22.
97. Sattler, “The Schleitheim Brotherly Union,” in Yoder, Legacy, 41.
98. Sattler, “Imprisonment: Letter to Horb,” in Yoder, Legacy, 61.
99. Sattler, “Imprisonment: Letter to Horb,” in Yoder, Legacy, 58.
100. Sattler, quoted in “Martyrdom” in Yoder, Legacy, 73.
101. Sattler, “Imprisonment: Letter to Horb,” in Yoder, Legacy, 59.
102. Sattler, “The Schleitheim Brotherly Union,” in Yoder, Legacy, 41; see also Sattler, quoted in “Martyrdom” in Yoder, Legacy, 74-75.
103. Sattler, quoted in “Martyrdom of Michael Sattler,” in Mergal, Anabaptist Writers, 142.
104. Sattler, “Parting with Strasbourg Reformers,” in Yoder, Legacy, 22-23.
105. Sattler, “The Schleitheim Brotherly Union,” in Yoder, Legacy, 35.
106. Sattler, “Parting with Strasbourg Reformers,” in Yoder, Legacy, 22-23.
107. Sattler, “The Schleitheim Brotherly Union,” in Yoder, Legacy, 43.
108. Sattler, “Imprisonment: Letter to Horb,” in Yoder, Legacy, 62.
109. Sattler, quoted in “Martyrdom of Michael Sattler,” in Mergal, Anabaptist Writers, 140.
110. Sattler, quoted in “Martyrdom of Michael Sattler,” in Mergal, Anabaptist Writers, 140.
111. Sattler, “Parting with Strasbourg Reformers,” in Yoder, Legacy, 22.
112. Sattler, “The Schleitheim Brotherly Union,” in Yoder, Legacy, 35.
113. Sattler, “Parting with Strasbourg Reformers,” in Yoder, Legacy, 22.
114. Sattler, “Parting with Strasbourg Reformers,” in Yoder, Legacy, 22.
115. Sattler, “Parting with Strasbourg Reformers,” in Yoder, Legacy, 22.
116. Sattler, “Imprisonment: Letter to Horb,” in Yoder, Legacy, 59.
117. Sattler, “Parting with Strasbourg Reformers,” in Yoder, Legacy, 22.
118. Finger, Anabaptist Theology, 332-33.
119. Sattler, “Parting with Strasbourg Reformers,” in Yoder, Legacy, 22.
120. Sattler, The Schleitheim Confession, 7.
121. Sattler, The Schleitheim Confession, 8.
122. Sattler, quoted in “Martyrdom of Michael Sattler,” in Mergal, Anabaptist Writers, 142.
123. Sattler, “Parting with Strasbourg Reformers,” in Yoder, Legacy, 22. Sattler also quotes the second half of Mark 16:15 which says, “He who does not believe will be damned.” This indicates that unbelief in Christ, not being without water baptism, sends a person to eternal judgment.
124. Sattler, The Schleitheim Confession, 10, 18.
125. Sattler, The Schleitheim Confession, 9-10.
126. Sattler, The Schleitheim Confession, 19.
127. Sattler, The Schleitheim Confession, 18.
128. Finger, Anabaptist Theology, 333.
129. See Sattler, “Imprisonment: Letter to Horb,” in Yoder, Legacy, 53, where he writes, “May the peace of Jesus Christ, and the love of the heavenly Father and the grace of Their Spirit keep you flawless, without sin, and present you joyous and pure before the vision of Their holiness at the coming of the Lord Jesus Christ.”
130. Sattler, The Schleitheim Confession, 13.
131. C. Arnold Snyder, Anabaptist History and Theology (Kitchener, Ontario: Pandora Press, 1997), 349.
132. Sattler, The Schleitheim Confession, 9.
133. Sattler, The Schleitheim Confession, 9.
134. Verduin, Reformers and Stepchildren, 105.
135. Sattler, “Imprisonment: Letter to Horb,” in Yoder, Legacy, 58, 60, where he writes, “Sanctify yourselves to Him who has sanctified you.”
136. Sattler, “Imprisonment: Letter to Horb,” in Yoder, Legacy, 60.
137. Sattler, “Parting with Strasbourg Reformers,” in Yoder, Legacy, 22.
138. Sattler, The Schleitheim Confession, 9, 19.
139. Sattler, “Imprisonment: Letter to Horb,” in Yoder, Legacy, 61.
140. Sattler, The Schleitheim Confession, 9.
141. Sattler, “Imprisonment: Letter to Horb,” in Yoder, Legacy, 59.
142. Sattler, “Imprisonment: Letter to Horb,” in Yoder, Legacy, 58-59.
143. Sattler, “Parting with Strasbourg Reformers,” in Yoder, Legacy, 22.
144. Sattler, “Parting with Strasbourg Reformers,” in Yoder, Legacy, 23.
145. Sattler, “Parting with Strasbourg Reformers,” in Yoder, Legacy, 23.
146. Sattler, The Schleitheim Confession, 11-12.
147. Sattler, The Schleitheim Confession, 12.
148. Sattler, “Parting with Strasbourg Reformers,” in Yoder, Legacy, 22.
149. Sattler, “Parting with Strasbourg Reformers,” in Yoder, Legacy, 23.
150. Sattler, “Parting with Strasbourg Reformers,” in Yoder, Legacy, 22.
151. Sattler, “Parting with Strasbourg Reformers,” in Yoder, Legacy, 23.
152. Mergal, Anabaptist Writers, 141-42.
153. Sattler, The Schleitheim Confession, 15.
154. Sattler, The Schleitheim Confession, 15.
155. Snyder, Anabaptist History, 273.
156. Mergal, Anabaptist Writers, 141.
157. Capito, “The Capito Letters,” in Yoder, Legacy, 95.
158. See Yoder, Legacy, 44-45, for a copy of the “Congregational Order” document.
159. Sattler, “Imprisonment: Letter to Horb,” in Yoder, Legacy, 62.
160. Sattler, “Imprisonment: Letter to Horb,” in Yoder, Legacy, 60.
161. Sattler, The Schleitheim Confession, 10-11.
162. Sattler, The Schleitheim Confession, 13.
163. Sattler, The Schleitheim Confession, 11.
164. Sattler, The Schleitheim Confession, 11.
165. Sattler, The Schleitheim Confession, 10.
166. Sattler, The Schleitheim Confession, 10.
167. Sattler, “Parting with Strasbourg Reformers,” in Yoder, Legacy, 22-23.
168. Sattler, “Parting with Strasbourg Reformers,” in Yoder, Legacy, 22.
169. Sattler, “Parting with Strasbourg Reformers,” in Yoder, Legacy, 23.
170. Sattler, “Imprisonment: Letter to Horb,” in Yoder, Legacy, 61.
171. Sattler, “Imprisonment: Letter to Horb,” in Yoder, Legacy, 61.