ZWINGLI SELECTIONS. I LETTER OF HULDREICH ZWINGLI TO ERASMUS FABRICIUS ABOUT THE PROCEEDINGS, ON THE 7TH, 8tH AND orH OF APRIL, 1522, OF THE DELEGATES SENT TO ZURICH BY THE BISHOP OF CONSTANCE. How the Reverend Lord Bishop of Constance, through his delegates, the suffragan Melchior [Wattli], John Wanner (who, however, I know took part in the affair against his will), and N[icholas] Brendlin, dealt with Huldreich Zwingli, preacher at Zurich, before the Board of Ecclesiastics and the Senate Tf on the 7th, 8th and oth days of April.
Zwingli to Erasmus Fabricius
On the seventh day of April the before mentioned Fathers came to our city pretty early, and I, knowing that they were coming, was trying to discover what their design was, and yet could not until late at night, when our beloved deacon, Henry Lutius, came and gave me warning that the clerk, as they call him, was getting together the whole body of priests for a meeting
[Zwingli’s Works, ed. Schuler u. Schulthess, iii., 7-16. Translated from]
[the original Latin by Mr. Henry Preble, New York city. t I. e., City Council, hence the members in it are called councillors, but the]
[Latin form Zwingli used has been allowed to stand. This body was in two]
[parts, the Small Council, which contained only 50 members, and only half of]
[these were on duty at any one time, and the Great Council, also called the]
[Council of the Two Hundred, which included the Small Council. The Great]
[Council was the deciding body on all legislative matters of importance, the]
[Small was the exeutive committee, and both were representative bodies. The]
[chief officer was the burgomaster, here called the President of the Senate.]
[. See my biography of Zwingli, pp. 42-44.]
early next morning at the usual place of assembly of the canons. I regarded it as a happy omen that the thing had been thus neatly set on foot by a courier both lame and without grace, and began to consider in my mind how they were likely to begin their job. At length I understood, as I thought, and when day dawned and we had come together the suffragan began in the fashion that will follow when I come to describe how the matter was carried on before the Senate. His whole speech was violent and full of rage and arrogance, though he took pains to hide the fact that he had any quarrel with me. For he avoided mentioning my name as scrupulously as if it were sacred, though meanwhile there was nothing that he didn’t say against me. When the tragedian had finished shrieking out his part, I stepped forward, feeling that it was unbecoming and disgraceful to allow a speech which might do so much damage to go unrebutted, especially as I saw from their sighs and their pale and silent faces that some of the feebler priests who had recently been won for Christ had been troubled by the tirade. Therefore I made answer upon the spur of the moment to the words of the suffragan, with what spirit or feeling the good men who heard me may judge. The general gist of what 1 said, however, you shall hear when we come to the proceedings before the Senate. The delegates abandoned this wing as routed and put to flight, and hurried quickly to another, to the Senate, namely, where, as I have learned from Senators, the same hayangue was delivered and my name was avoided in the same way, and the Senate was persuaded not to have me summoned. For they said they had no concern whatever with me. After this the opinions varied for some time, but finally they decided that the Commons (that is, two hundred men, called the Greater Senate), should meet in full assembly on the following day, and that the bishops of the city, of whom there are three
[Zwingli uses this term of the people’s priests or preachers of the three]
[parish churches in Zurich, viz., the Great Minster, Minster of our Lady,]
[and St. Peter’s. He explains it below.]
THE EPISCOPAL VISITATION. II of us, should be warned not to be present. For nothing was going to be said in reply to our friends, no one could contradict so sound a speech, and so on. When I discovered this, I devoted “all my energy to getting us admitted to the meeting of the Senate to be held on the following day. For a long time I turned every stone in vain, for the chief men of the Senate said it could not be done, inasmuch as the Senate had voted otherwise. Then I began to cease my efforts and to plead with sighs to him who heareth the groans of those in bondage not to abandon the truth, but to come to the defense of his gospel, which he had willed to have us preach. At length on the ninth the citizens assembled, and loudly vented their indignation at their bishops not being admitted, but they of the Senate which from its number is called the Less resisted because they had voted otherwise previously. The Greater Senate, however, compelled them against their will to put the matter to vote, and it was decided that their bishops should be present and hear everything, and if need be make “answer. Thus, not, as Livy says, did the greater part prevail over the better; for here both the greater and the better part prevailed. And this I have allowed myself to write, not for the sake of laying any blame upon the Lesser Senate, but to show what plotting and underhand action can accomplish. For what else were the delegates of the Bishop of Constance after but to say without witnesses whatever came into their mouths before the simple minded commons? Thanks be to God. For when the delegates were brought into the Senate, we bishops of Zurich were also admitted, Henry Engelhard, LL.D., of the nunnery, Rudolph Roschlin, bishop of St. Peter’s, and I, Huldreich Zwingli. Then