CHURCH: History and Today Feb. 3

Ulrich Zwingli

Last week we talked about Martin Luther and his role in ushering in the Reformation officially. Today we’ll be talking about another man who lived and worked during the same time as Luther, a man named Ulrich Zwingli. While Luther was busy working in Germany, Zwingli was coming to his views in Switzerland.

Before we begin, what do we know about Zwingli? His life, views, theology, etc...

Zwingli was born in a small Swiss village in 1484, just two months after Martin Luther was born in Germany. He studied in both Bern and Basel, and received his Master of Arts degree from the University of Basel in 1506. After this he became a priest in the village of Glarus, where he stayed as a priest for 10 years.

Key Influences on Zwingli

Zwingli became known not only as a pastor and a scholar, but he was also a patriot. To give a bit of history on Switzerland, during Zwingli’s time Switzerland wasn’t really a unified country, but rather a patchwork quilt of different multi-states, or cantons. The Swiss confederation had become known for its bodies of mercenary soldiers. These soldiers-for-hire were recruited across Europe for various battles and military needs, and this had become a large and steady income for the various Swiss cantons. So when soldiers from his district went on a military quest for the Pope and church in 1512, and later in 1517, Zwingli went along as chaplain. What he saw on the battlefield had a major impact on him not only as a priest, but as a theologian and politician as well. He saw what his people were like when they won, brutally looting the conquered areas, and also what it was like when they lost, where thousands of Swiss soldiers died for someone else’e cause. He became convinced that mercenary service like this was wrong, and it also caused him to doubt the Pope and the church for whom his countrymen had died.

Differing Views

This jump-started a pursuit of Biblical truth. In 1516, Erasmus (remember from two weeks ago) had just published his brand new Greek New Testament, and Zwingli bought one and read LOTS. He had studied Greek over the years, and he continued to hone those skills and interpret Scripture straight from Scripture rather than from anywhere else. He said, “led by the Word and Spirit of God I saw the need to set aside all these [human teachings] and learn the doctrine of God direct from His own Word.”

Over time, Zwingli started preaching based off of what he found in the Bible. He did a lot of studying, and by 1518 he came to views that were quite similar to Luther’s, but the way he got there was quite different. While Luther went on his internally agonizing quest, Zwingli went a different route. Being influenced by the Renaissance and the humanist philosophy that often came with it, he studied the Greek Bible in that style. He went “to the sources,” not only the Bible but other historical writings as well. The Bible was the basis of Christian faith, and humanism encouraged a return to the sources. One quote I found put it this way, “Where Luther opened the Bible to find Christ, Zwingli sought more simply to open the Bible.”

Luther and Zwingli had different methods of getting to some very similar conclusions. Which route do you prefer? Why? Is one right or wrong? Do both/either of these approaches play a role today?

Zwingli started preaching on the views that he found in the Bible, even when they seemed to contradict the traditional views that he officially represented as a priest of the Catholic church. Travelers spread news about him, and he became well known, to the point that in 1518, he was transferred to the Great Minster in Zurich to preach. This was still officially a Catholic church, but he found great support in the city for his views.

A year later, an epidemic of plague went through Zurich and killed about 1/4 of the population, Zwingli almost died. This impacted his life in a dramatic way as he had to face death and found his trust in Christ.

The Break with Rome

A year later, an epidemic of plague went through Zurich and killed about 1/4 of the population, Zwingli almost died. This impacted his life in a dramatic way.

In 1519, a seller of indulgences came to Zurich. Now based on what we know so far about Zwingli, we can imagine that this peddler was not welcome. In fact, Zwingli convinced the city government that the salesman should be expelled from the city before he could sell anything! This is a clear and dramatic break from the Catholic church, who had promoted this sales campaign. To deny the salesman was to deny those he represented, the Church itself.

However, the Church didn’t really do anything about this for quite a while. One of the big reasons was that the Catholic church and its various popes still relied on Swiss mercenaries to strengthen their armies. “And so, while increasingly disturbed by reports from Zurich, popes did not feel they could afford to annoy the town by excommunicating Zwingli.” (Reeves, 71).

This gave Zwingli time to strengthen his convictions, even while he was officially paid by the church he was disagreeing with! He memorized most of the Greek New Testament, and studied long and hard, not just the Bible and other theological works, but classics like Greek literature and philosophy. Eventually, some Catholic leaders in the city called him out on some of his new ideas. A debate was arranged, and Zwingli came out the clear winner. He had become familiar not only with Greek, but also with Hebrew and Latin. The Catholic representative hardly even responded when Zwingli defended the conclusions he had come to.

As a priest, Zwingli had made vows of celibacy. But in all his studies in Scripture he could not find Biblical support for this, so he wrote to the Pope asking permission to get married. When this was denied, he got married in secret, to Anna Reinhart, and together they enjoyed a healthy and happy marriage.

Opposition

Remember that during this time Switzerland was made up of various cantons, and each canton had its own unique laws, regulations, and semblance of government. Over time some of these cantons came to support Zwingli and his reforms, while others remained Catholic. Obviously this led to tension between the different cantons. After a series of back-and-forths, civil war started in Switzerland. In 1531, the five Catholic cantons made a surprise attack on Zurich, and the city was not ready for it. Knowing that losing this battle might mean the end of his teaching, Zwingli went out with the first soldiers, hoping to stall the army long enough for an actual defense force to be raised. However, the Catholic army won, and Zwingli was killed by a mercenary captain who found him after the battle among the injured.

A treaty was signed, which stated that the different Swiss cantons could make its own choices concerning religion, rather than the Catholics or the Protestants forcing their views on one another. This meant that Zwingli’s teachings stayed very much alive, and his work was continued by Heinrich Bullinger, a close friend and disciple of Zwingli.

Zwingli’s Reforms

Much was done under Zwingli’s pastoral care in Zurich. Over the years, many practices were changed and completely removed from church life. What Zwingli saw as the greatest sin of all was that of idolatry. He was incredibly thorough in removing anything from church practice and worship that he thought might distract anyone from worshipping Christ.

What are some examples of things that Zwingli might consider idolatrous or distracting from worshipping the true God?

Here is where we find a major difference in how Luther and Zwingli characterized reformed Christian life. Luther believed that if the church does not prohibit it, we can allow it in worship. Zwingli taught that if the Bible does not specifically teach it, we cannot use it in worship. One of the things that fit this and the ‘idolatrous’ label was instrument music in church services. To be fair, Zwingli was a musician, and he played the violin quite well actually. But church organs (used in Catholic services) and violins were not found in the Bible, so they should be removed. Statues, relics, paintings, priestly robes, crucifixes, even candles were removed from church buildings since they could distract people from true worship and draw them to the material rather than the spiritual, and they were not found in the Bible.

Another major change in practice was in communion. There was a teaching at this point in the Catholic mass that taught if you partake in one of the elements of mass (the bread or the wine) it covers both of them, so you don’t have to partake in both. This became standard in mass, where the laity would only receive one element. But again, Zwingli didn’t find this in the Bible. “Instead of celebrating Mass, plain bread rolls were placed on wooden plates on a simple table in the middle of the church; next to them was a jug of wine. No Latin was intoned; everything was in the Swiss German the people could understand. Then, for the first time, the people, while still seated in their pews, were given not only the bread but also the wine.” (Reeves, 78)

Can we see anything in what we know about Zwingli that we affirm or disagree with? Based on what we know about Luther, is there anything that would cause tension between these two reformers?

The theology behind communion was actually a big sticking point for both Zwingli and Luther. Much of their teaching was similar, but there were some tensions between the two, so a meeting was arranged. They agreed on almost everything except on the Lord’s Supper. And here I’ll read another short excerpt from Michael Reeves’ book The Unquenchable Flame.

These differing views on the Lord’s Supper are not just little differences in the sea of their agreements, but rather this disagreement shows their different views and the processes they used to get to those teachings. While they both completely based everything off of the Bible, their methodology was very different, as we saw earlier.

Luther and Zwingli disagreed on the Lord’s Supper, and as a result of this one thing they couldn’t agree on, the German and Swiss reformations mostly continued separately. Does this hard and fast stance on beliefs continue today, or are we ready to compromise for the sake of unity? What should we be willing to lay aside and what should we hold to?

Conclusion

While Luther gets the title of “head reformer,” we can see that there were others during his time who called strongly for change. Zwingli came to his conclusions through humanist study of the Bible and a return to the sources of Christian faith, and is the forerunner for the Anabaptist movement that Mennonites ultimately come from.

Are there any final thoughts, comments or questions?

A strong theme in Zwingli’s teaching is the emphasis on the Spiritual and not on the physical. This is one reason he tried so hard to simplify church worship, we should focus on the spiritual and on Christ, not on the physical things. This is also part of why he and Luther disagreed on the Lord’s supper. To close, I want to read a few verses out of Colossians 2:20-3:4.