end to indulgences, to the celibacy of the clergy and to convents and
monasteries. He, too, favoured the use of the language of the people in
preaching.7 Zwingli differed from Luther in emphasis by stressing not
only salvation by faith but also a life of good works. Like Luther he saw
the whole of society within given geographic boundaries as constituting
a Christian body. This meant that the church in Ztirich consisted of all
the citizens of Ziirich. Unity of faith was essential to Zwingli’s
interpretation of the church. It was perfectly proper for the priest of the
Grossmiinster and the Council of Ztirich to work hand in hand in
building the kingdom of God.8

Among Zwingli’s disciples were several young men who were to
play leading roles in the Anabaptist movement. One was Conrad
Grebei, who had been a student at the universities of Paris, Basel and
Vienna. Zwingii and Grebe! were attracted to each other. Both had been
exposed to the breath of fresh air in religious thought; both were
genuinely interested in biblical Christianity; both had high ideals
regarding the meaning of Christian discipleship. But ultimately Grebel
and other radicals could not become part of Zwingii’s experiment in
Ziirich because of fundamental differences in views on the nature of the
church. Authority lay in the Scriptures alone, they said, and the Council
of Ziirich could not make decisions in theological matters. The church
was constituted of believers who voluntarily chose to become disciples
of Christ, they declared, and the city or state could not fulfill the
requirements of the church’s calling.g

It was for these reasons that infant baptism became the focal point
of the dispute between Zwingli and Grebel. The baptism of all infants
into the church was essential to the nature of Zwingli’s city of God. The
baptism of adults, who freely and voluntarily submitted to Christian
discipleship, was essential to the rebirth of the New Testament church
as Grehel understood that church.” Grebcl, Felix Manz, Georg
Blaurock (also called Georg vom Haus Jakob), and others of this
persuasion were calling for the separation of church and state, an idea
conceived by neither Luther not Zwingli. Grebcl also advocated
absolute Christian non-resistance.”

The Council of Ziirich evidently realized the implications of this
stand. The demand was not for a mere institutional change such as a
transference of authority from Rome to Zt’irich. The demand was not
for certain further reforms that Zwingli was opposing. If it had been
that, negotiation might have been possible. These reformers were
hewing at the pillars of the existing religious, social and political
order. ‘2

The Council of Ziirich acted. On January 1?, 1525, a public debate
was held to silence the radicals. Conrad Grehel and Felix Manz,
another young erstwhile follower of Zwingli, represented the dissenting
groups at this encounter with Zwingli and the Council.'3 Shortly there-
after the Council ordered that all children be baptized within eight days,

 

 

 

Aron? and Ursula van Essen, Maestrlclvt, Netherlands
were executed for their faith during the persecutions of
the sixteenth century. Ararat was an older and school
teacher: The illustration depicts the tortures of Ursula.