Hsieh 1

Anabaptist Letters and the Change in Leadership Styles Due to the Muenster Rebellion

Edward Hsieh

Sreenivasan 3/19/2015

History 123B

When Martin Luther openly defied the rulings of the church, many others, optimistic

about reforming the church and removing the corrupt hierarchy, emulated him and formed their

own sects based on their own interpretation of Scripture. One such group was the Anabaptists,

whose viewpoints could be seen in a variety of documents, including the Schleitheim Confession

of Faith by Michael Sattler, A Confession by Obbe Phillips, Cherished Instructions on Sin...and

the Community of Goods by Ulrich Stadler, and A Reply to False Accusations by Menno Simons.

The oldest text indicates that Anabaptists were initially meant to be pacifistic and isolated from

the world (so that they may focus their faith and loyalty to God), with charismatic leaders to

instruct the followers on proper teachings. Over time, due to charismatic leaders taking the

Anabaptist doctrines too far to their logical conclusion, the community was forced to

compromise. While some basic principles of Anabaptism remained the same, there were some

compromises, such as declaring loyalty to the secular state also and using the group to question

and ensure a leader's credentials. Anabaptism, due to its disdain of secular authority as well as

controversial moral ideals and message, became hated by other Christians. Muenster only

confirmed the worst fears of outside observers. The violence in Muenster also exacerbated

matters. Anabaptism also showed how quickly the ideas of the Reformation could be corrupted:

anyone could interpret Scripture, so simply preaching it wasn't enough.

In the beginning, Anabaptism was based around justification by free will. The Anabaptist

believer, illuminated by word and text, would have the choice of answering the offer of God's
 Hsieh 2

salvation. After this, God takes the believer's initiation into account and asks that the Anabaptist

do good deeds and thus be saved. In the Schleitheim Confession, Sattler expresses this by

mentioning that "baptism shall be given to those who have learned repentance and amendment of

life, and who truly believe that their sins are taken away from Christ" ( Sattler 72). The emphasis

is on those who have the capacity to believe in the forgiveness of Christ. Sattler's ideas also

reveal that baptism can only be accepted under free will, and as a knowing pledge to God. Thus,

infants could not actually be baptized, as they have no will or capacity of consent. Unlike the

other denominations (which treat the Eucharist as the actual flesh of Christ), the Eucharist is

treated as a symbolic pledge to honor the memory of Jesus.

Perhaps the more controversial tenet of Anabaptist belief is that "a separation shall be

made from the evil and from the wickedness which the devil planted in this world" (Sattler 73).

To the Anabaptists, the secular world is to be separated from the spiritual due to its corrupting

influence; governments and secular power use methods that are against Christian tenets, so the

good Christian is one not involved with society at large. The expectation was that Anabaptists

would be vindicated for their actions during Judgment Day. In addition, according to Scripture,

Christ refused kingship, thus the Christian emulating Jesus should also avoid secular affairs.

Instead, a good Christian is to focus only on the spiritual, and thus avoid the secular world.

Perhapsin order to emphasize this power, the Schleistheim Confession states that "the oath is a

confirmation among those who are quarreling or making promises" (Sattler 75). Acts are to be

done according to the will of God and in truth; to swear oaths could mean detracting from this.

Like many Protestant sects in the beginning, the Anabaptists were optimistic. They had

hoped that simply being disconnected from the secular world and following Scripture was

enough to live as a Christian. To reinforce this though, the pastor was to "read, to admonish and
 Hsieh 3

teach...and in all things to see to the care of the body of Christ in order that it may be built up and

developed, and the mouth of the slanderer be stopped" (Sattler 73). Thus the rule of the priest

was to be the one in the outside world, but also be the one instructing the people based on

Scripture. Given the Anabaptist disdain for the commands of the established church, however,

this also meant that the only position of power was the pastor, who had control over the people.

Without institutional oversight or formalization of credentials, a particularly charismatic figure

could quickly usurp the Anabaptist community and preach his own ideas. The result of a lack of

control over the priests of Anabaptism was the possibility for men like John of Leyden to take

over, a danger which was especially prominent in the Muenster Rebellion. One of Obbe Philips'

regrets was the fact "while no one can believe without hearing, so also no one can preach until he

is commissioned. And he who boasts that he is commissioned shall demonstrate his commission

with strength and deed" (Phillips 206). Whenever one of the newcomers, such as John Matthjis

were challenge, they would simply shout and curse those who would deny them, until people

were intimidated into obey the newcomers.

In addition to the usurpation of priesthood by young upstarts, there were also other ideas

of the Muenster Rebellion that were also characterized by the radicalization of the ideas

proposed by early Anabaptists. Anabaptists had believed that in exchange for their non violence,

they would be vindicated at the end of times, and began following prophecies. So when men like

Melchior appeared before the Anabaptist community claiming to be a prophet offering divine

truth, it was no surprise that many members of the community would fall in line. For three of the

leaders to cry out "the new city is given to the children of God" and "woe, woe to all the godless"

(Phillips 219) while brandishing swords was not a breach of the Anabaptist beliefs. Instead, all of

this was an expression that the end of times are here, and that the Christian people should
 Hsieh 4

overthrow corrupt authority to usher in paradise. Fighting during the end of times also

represented a radical interpretation of the declaration in the Schleitheim Confession that "the

Christians' weapon are spiritual, against the fortifications of evil" (Sattler 75). Since the world

around them was godless and the kingdom of God was coming, they were to fight the evil and

restore the kingdom. The behavior of rebels like John of Leyden was also an extension of the

Schleitheim Confession's conclusion, where the author tells the reader to "keep watch on all who

do not walk according to the simplicity of the divine truth which is stated in this letter...eliminate

from you that which is evil and the Lord will be your God and you will be his sons and

daughters" (Sattler 75). When the Anabaptists seized control of Muenster, they quickly realized

that a city was much larger in scale than the exiled community that was the norm. In response,

the Anabaptist leaders attempted to rule with an iron fist just like the pastors did, surveying the

citizens of Muenster and eliminating what the leaders saw as sin. In practice this did not last

long; people began pushing back, and eventually the Anabaptists turned to more and more

brutality to maintain order until the bishop prince massacred them.

In the aftermath of the Muenster rebellion, the Anabaptists experienced a harsh edge of

reality. Obbe Phillips frequently lamented that it took experience before wisdom was acquired,

while Menno Simons (even if he never been to Muenster) immediately rejects any connection to

Muenster. The fact was, the Anabaptists could not simply read the Scripture or follow their

doctrines to live life. The massacre in Muenster proved that charismatic leaders who pushed too

far will provoke chaos. It also made Anabaptists aware that in order to survive they would have

to spend time proving themselves different from the ways of Muenster; popular opinion would

otherwise make them out to be seditionists and rebels.

 Hsieh 5

Thus the faith, which once refused establish church and secular authority, was forced to

formalize authority. Stadler writes that "the deacons of the Lord to have watchful eyes in all this

and to judge and treat everybody in his community according to the mind and Spirit of Christ...so

it is, indeed, possible to receive [someone] in the Lord with the consent of the whole

brotherhood" (Stadler 276). The same also applied to applying the ban. What the passage

indicates is that the leadership of the Anabaptists have become bureaucratic. If priests were to

enact certain actions, it would have to be reviewed by the group before judgment. Similarly if a

convert claimed to have repented, the claim would have to be checked for credibility. While

deacons still control the power (Stadler was adamant about the power of the deacon still

remaining), the review and examination of credibility meant it was harder to abuse the trust of

the community. Treatment was also expected to be equal, as everyone was equal to the gift of

Christ. In fact, in Stadler's passages, to disobey the rules of the Lord results in fire from God and

uprooting (like a tree that bears no fruits). The decision to formalize authority also ensured that

the Anabaptists were united in their message. After all, if the Anabaptists were supposed to

preach the truth, then the deacons would have to be regulated to ensure that the message of

salvation was the same. As an extension to the need to have truth, there was a need for authority

in order to enforce said truth. As Muenster had demonstrated, to have no authority and no control

over the Anabaptist message would lead to differing messages and radical dissent.

There was also a higher expectation of being separate from secular society, since "true

children of God should group themselves and hold together here in misery" but not "make big

concentrations but rather, as opportunity affords, they should have many or at least a few houses

(Stadler 280). The Anabaptists should live away from the non Christian world, but also not band

too closely or the community itself could be jeopardized. If the Anabaptist communities grew too
 Hsieh 6

large, it could be a tempting target for secular repression. As a compromise to separation from

secular society, Menno Simons himself mentions that "we publicly and unequivocally confess

that the office of a magistrate is ordained of God, even as we have confessed, since according to

our small talent we have served the Word of the Lord" (Simmons 124). It simply was not enough

to owe loyalty only to God anymore like in the Schleisthem Confession's disavowal of oath;

Anabaptists had to also swear loyalty to the state to gain some trust.

Regardless of reform, the doctrines of the Anabaptists naturally estranged the other

Christians from them. For most other Christian denominations, Christianity is an aspect of

society. Luther in fact established that secular power was used to ensure a Christian's rights to

their practices. Various rites like baptism and Eucharist were a way to induct people to the faith.

Politically, the prince and political powers decide the faith, thus making faith just as much a part

of society. To both conservative factions, the Anabaptists were a radical force dangerous for

society. Anabaptists after all, saw religion as an separate aspect of society, with only voluntary

adults joining; Anabaptist beliefs were the antithesis of the more conservative Christian

denominations. Considering this drive for an elite, Christian community, Anabaptists imply that

the other Christian denominations were not Christian, as only those not involved in the secular

world were Christians. In addition, life in the sixteenth century were defined by rights within the

community. For the Anabaptists to reject community itself and live in seclusion was to reject the

order of society and thus threaten the faith of the majority. This was symbolized by the

Anabaptist refusal to pledge to secular authority; since the prince was the head of the church, the

Anabaptists refusing community and the pledge was to prove themselves disloyal and against the

faith and order of the state.

 Hsieh 7

The Muenster Rebellion only confirmed the assumptions of outside observers. To

most people, the Muenster Rebellion symbolized the dangers of excessive radical interpretation,

and how quickly it could lead to people into debauchery. Menno Simons still had to defend his

sect of Anabaptists from being claimed as murderers and usurpers of state. Perhaps the real

reason why the Muenster Rebellion turned many against Anabaptism was because it was one of

many rebellions that troubled the evangelical movements. Luther and other leaders initally

thought that it was enough to simply read the Scripture, and through divine will, preach the truth.

The Muenster Rebellion was a rude awakening to evangelical idealism. Leaders quickly realize

much more would have to be done to ensure the Reformation would carry the same weight as the

Catholic church. There also needed to be a set rule and formalized authority in order to spread

the truth. In a way, regardless of reform or not, Anabaptism became a reminder of the worst that

Scriptural interpretation could bring.

While at first content with separation from secular society, following Scripture and

letting charismatic leaders lead the community, over time the Anabaptist leaders took the basic

doctrines and radicalized it. Post Muenster Rebellion, the following Anabaptist groups chose to

change their leadership to be based more on merit than charisma, ensuring leaders don't take the

Anabaptists into chaotic times again. Regardless of this, the Anabaptists ideas being too

controversial, plus Muenster, made them a target of hatred for the other Christians. Eventually,

the Thirty Years War would come, and unable to hide anywhere in Europe, the Anabaptists flee

to America.