Bullinger’s Respect for Zwingli

Bullinger did not always see eye to eye with Zwingli. For example, Bullinger would not have agreed with the actions vis-à-vis church and state that Zwingli championed that led the the disaster at Kappel in 1531. The new arrangements in the church at Zurich that were introduced when Bullinger became Antistes is testimony to this. But what is abundantly clear was Bullinger’s respect for Zwingli.

An earlier post referred to how Bullinger compared the role of Zwingli to that of an Old Testament prophet. Bullinger also referred to Zwingli as a Josiah-type figure as is apparent from the following quote from a work of Bullinger in 1527:

“… Thereupon God has now not only produced through him a great power among so hard and impious a people, as we Eidgenossen have been until now, a power with which he through his preaching has for the most part converted them to the truth; but also God has through him set forth for us in a clear way, as no one has done for a thousand years, the chief point of his religion, as the whole essence and fundamental knowledge of God, namely, the understanding of his one eternal covenant, on account of which mankind should turn from all creatures and should follow after God alone, through whom are destroyed all false gods and those who follow them. Thus we have also learned from him how Christ is the one eternal mediator and intercessor; also how the one faith in the Lord Jesus Christ from the Holy Spirit is the only thing which sanctifies, assures, and quiets our consciences – and not confession, not external signs, not absolution. Moreover, in connection with it are the keys to what original sin is, and to what the whole business of baptism amounts to. Now if this point truly is the chief on in the Christian religion, and as God has now made it as plain as day to us through him, then it is nothing new ore marvelous that through the same one there is brought to us again the old faith, the right doctrine, and the true use of the Eucharist. Now the papacy had perverted the old practice, did not keep the true faith, and established the Mass. And it is as if Zwingli were our Josiah sent from God, through whom the Mass was destroyed and the Remembrance restored, through whom also the idols have been exterminated, the ‘Deuteronomy’ found, and the covenant which we have with God brought forward again.”

This work of Bullinger was written on 14 May 1527 and entitled “Von warer und falscher leer, altem und nüwem glouben undbruch der Eucharistien oder Mesz, wie sy anfencklich gehalten und mitt was mittel sy in missbuch kummen sye.”

An earlier post also referred to the events that led Bullinger to pen the Warhaftes Bekenntnis (1545) in response to the vitriolic attacks of an aging Luther. The full title in English of this work is: A truthful Confession of the Servants of the Church at Zürich as to what they hold from the Word of God and in common with the holy universal Christian church believe and teach especially concerning the Lord’s Supper, in answer to the Slander, Condemnations and Jests of Dr Martin Luther as translated by John T. McNeill, Unitive Protestantism: The Ecumenical Spirit in its Persistent Expression, (Richmond: John Knox Press, 1964 p193). Clearly, one of the driving forces that spurred Bullinger to compose this work was his respect for Zwingli.

Amy Nelson Burnett has written a very comprehensive account of the dynamics behind the scenes in the various attempts at securing closer ties between Zurich, Strasburg and the Lutherans in a period more or less contemporaneous with Trent – “Heinrich Bullinger and the Problem of Eucharistic Concord” in Emidio Campi and Peter Opitz (eds.) Heinrich Bullinger: Life-Thought-Influence, pp233-250. The following observations are taken from this perceptive article.

Calvin became both impatient and perhaps somewhat frustrated at Bullinger’s apparent abhorrence in seeking closer ties with the Lutherans. Calvin wrote to Farel in the fall of 1557: “it is shameful to write just how deeply Bullinger abhors the idea of a colloquy.”

Burnett concludes: “The repeated condemnation of Zwingli and his followers, and finally the explicit exclusion of the Zwinglians from the terms of the Peace of Augsburg, turned Bullinger against any attempt to court the Lutherans after 1555. He complained about the Lutherans’ attitude toward Zwingli in letters to Jean Calvin and Jan a Lasco in the spring of 1556, and his resentment only deepened after he learned of developments at the colloquy of Worms in the fall of 1557. As he noted bitterly in a letter to Simon Sulzer and the Basel church, ‘Along with Zwingli, the most ferocious Saxons condemned Osiander, Schwenckfeld, the Anabaptists, and I don’t know whom else. All of these others were spared; only Zwingli was deemed worthy to be damned before all the legates of the Empire.’ How, Bullinger asked, could the Swiss ever hope to counter such prejudice?”

Obviously there were some theological issues that Bullinger required to be sorted out with Calvin, Bucer and the Lutherans (eg the terms exhibere and substantia). But there is no doubt that one underlying reason for his reticence at seeking closer ties with the Lutherans was his unswerving respect for and loyalty to Zwingli.