Michael Scott
Professor Gamel
REL 1350
3 October 2014
The Michael Scott Confession of Faith During the sixteenth century, Europe and the church went through what is called the Radical Reformation. This movement was supplemented by some of the founding church leaders, such as Martin Luther and many others. The Schleiteim Confession itself comes from a sect of Christianity called Anabaptists. This denomination was persecuted and during the sixteenth and seventeenth century by the Protestants and Roman Catholics because of their “radical” views of faith and baptism. During this time of persecution and suffering, Michael Sattler, a prominent church figure, called a meeting of other Swiss Anabaptists. Together, they authored and wrote the Schleitheim …show more content…
The first of these is Baptism. Unlike the Roman Catholics, the confession states that only those who believe in the death and resurrection of Jesus Christ’s and repent of their sins can be able to have a baptism. This means that infant baptism is completely excluded from their beliefs. One of the reasons why many Roman Catholics despise them is because, the Anabaptists clearly state that infant baptism is the highest abomination of the pope, and proceeded to use New Testament scripture to back up their claim. The second article of the confession contains writings regarding excommunication in the church and church discipline. When one occasionally falls into sin in the church, they will be admonished twice in secret and once in front of the body of the church. Thirdly, the Anabaptists state that whoever has not believed in Christ and has not been baptized cannot break bread or drink from the cup of communion. Fourthly, and in my opinion, one of their more radical claims explains that they should not have fellowship with anyone who does not believe in Christ. It is stated that all creatures are in two classes; good and bad, believing and unbelieving, and neither can have part with the other. The fifth article explains the role of pastors in the church and how to select them. Going off of Paul’s prescription of pastors, they should be one who has always had a good …show more content…
Some of their ideas went completely against what most of society believed about the church, religion, morality, the papacy, and the relationship between church and state. I have great respect for Michael Sattler, and the rest of the Swiss Anabaptists for standing up for their convictions and for resisting the corrupt infrastructure that the Papacy entailed. While some of their ideas I do not agree with, I completely respect them for their strong faith and their ability to stand up for their beliefs against
Professor Gamel
REL 1350
3 October 2014
The Michael Scott Confession of Faith During the sixteenth century, Europe and the church went through what is called the Radical Reformation. This movement was supplemented by some of the founding church leaders, such as Martin Luther and many others. The Schleiteim Confession itself comes from a sect of Christianity called Anabaptists. This denomination was persecuted and during the sixteenth and seventeenth century by the Protestants and Roman Catholics because of their “radical” views of faith and baptism. During this time of persecution and suffering, Michael Sattler, a prominent church figure, called a meeting of other Swiss Anabaptists. Together, they authored and wrote the Schleitheim …show more content…
The first of these is Baptism. Unlike the Roman Catholics, the confession states that only those who believe in the death and resurrection of Jesus Christ’s and repent of their sins can be able to have a baptism. This means that infant baptism is completely excluded from their beliefs. One of the reasons why many Roman Catholics despise them is because, the Anabaptists clearly state that infant baptism is the highest abomination of the pope, and proceeded to use New Testament scripture to back up their claim. The second article of the confession contains writings regarding excommunication in the church and church discipline. When one occasionally falls into sin in the church, they will be admonished twice in secret and once in front of the body of the church. Thirdly, the Anabaptists state that whoever has not believed in Christ and has not been baptized cannot break bread or drink from the cup of communion. Fourthly, and in my opinion, one of their more radical claims explains that they should not have fellowship with anyone who does not believe in Christ. It is stated that all creatures are in two classes; good and bad, believing and unbelieving, and neither can have part with the other. The fifth article explains the role of pastors in the church and how to select them. Going off of Paul’s prescription of pastors, they should be one who has always had a good …show more content…
Some of their ideas went completely against what most of society believed about the church, religion, morality, the papacy, and the relationship between church and state. I have great respect for Michael Sattler, and the rest of the Swiss Anabaptists for standing up for their convictions and for resisting the corrupt infrastructure that the Papacy entailed. While some of their ideas I do not agree with, I completely respect them for their strong faith and their ability to stand up for their beliefs against