So I want to bring you a biography of a man that we should be aware of and from church history, someone who is oftentimes fascinating to me. Now, he's a guy who is both recognized as a very significant figure and yet seems to be a virtual unknown in many respects. He is one of the three great Reformation leaders. Now I did a real quick informal poll of a couple of people, and it's interesting. If I ask the question, who are the three great reformers, almost everyone comes up with Luther right off the bat. And then most people have to think about for a minute, oh, Calvin. And the third one, not sure. Not sure. No one's really sure. But this is the third reformer, Ulrich Zwingli. And he was from the Swiss Reformation. And so I want to go through some of his life because I find it fascinating, and there's a number of points I want to bring out from this thing. So, I see a quote here. So, words that he used quite a bit. So, he was born in 1484. in a small canton in Switzerland, what is now Switzerland. And, just to give you a little time frame, this is a few years, of course, before Columbus accidentally discovered the United States, or North America, but it was seven weeks after Martin Luther was born. So, he was born to a, I guess, a well-off family that was heavily connected in a small town of Switzerland. On the internet, it was looking up some information. They said this was his house. Well, call me skeptical. But I do say that this is probably a representative house of his time era and his geographic area. His education. He quickly showed himself to be a man of great promise in education. And after a few years, he excelled all of his teachers in his local town. So at age 14, he went off to the University of Vienna, and then he later earned his bachelor's and master's degree at the University of Basel. Now, some influences during this time to be aware of. First of all, he was under a number of professors who were very highly regarded Renaissance humanist professors. Now, I should explain that real quick. The term humanist today has a rather negative connotation. But in that era, to be a humanist was to have an interest in the old classics. Many of the humanist architects would go back and study the architecture of Rome. They wanted to find out how did they make these amazing structures. They would go back, and if you were interested in literature, you'd go back and study the ancient Greek and Roman Latin texts. And one of those that dominated that, of course, was the Bible. So, you had an interest in the languages of Hebrew, Greek, and Latin. They were looking for finding out what they just renewed interest in these old texts So he came into that where he was had a fascination with that. He was a great Linguist he has very much skill in the area, but he also came under the influence of this man named Thomas Wittenbach Thomas Wittenbach is pretty much an unknown to history with the exception of what Zwingli comments about him. Zwingli just makes a few comments about him. He says, Zwingli calls him the most learned and holiest of men, who taught that the death of Christ was the sole price of remission of sins, and to not trust in the Church, but faith is the key which unlocks to the soul the treasury of the remission of sins. He also explained to him quite a bit about the Lord's Tepper, how it is a memorial and not a sacrifice. So, here's this very interesting, this very early gospel spark, this man who planted this gospel spark in the life of a young Zwingli. And we don't know anything else about him, but to give him this kind of a teaching at that age, we don't see that at this point in time this spark that was left by this man was fanned into flames in the life of Zwingli, but Zwingli counts him as being the spark that triggered it in later years. So, we need more men like this who just, at some point in time, just drop in these things into the lives of men. And you never know where they're going to go. So, his early ministry and his growth. After graduation in 1506, he was ordained into the priesthood at Galerus. A couple of things that came of interest here. One is that he began studying Erasmus and Erasmus' Greek New Testament. Now, this man Erasmus is a very significant figure. He is not one of the Reformers, but there's a common phrase about him that he is the man who laid the egg that Luther hatched. He was the one who set up the whole, going back to this text of the Bible, and studying the Bible, and he produced what became the definitive Greek New Testament of his day. It was used extensively by the Reformers. So, here he is, he's studying Erasmus, and he's starting to delve deeply into Erasmus' Greek New Testament. And he went to it so deeply that he began writing out his own copy. of the Greek New Testament numerous times, trying to memorize the entire book. He was just immersing himself in this book. But we still don't see much in the way of a Reformed influence going on here. Now, another thing that came up is he was sent on a mission. I should explain a little bit about Switzerland at the time. was a country that did not have much by way of natural resources. They did not have great farmland. They did not have any mines or anything like that. They were all hill country. The only thing they had a lot of was people. And so what they did was they had nothing to export. This was before the days of numbered accounts, chocolate, and clocks. But they had nothing really to export, so their economy, their export economy, was based on sending young men off as mercenaries to fight in foreign wars. And it was known for over a hundred years that if you wanted to win a war in Europe, the best thing to do was to go hire a whole bunch of Swiss pikemen. They were fierce warriors. So they were highly in demand. The kings of France, Spain, and even the Pope himself vied for their services. So, he went along on some of these and became appalled at what was going on and just how terrible this was to both Switzerland, his native country, he was a patriot, he was a very strong patriot, but also just in his congregation, he saw the destruction. This had a great effect on him. And it started out being one of the first of the controversies that he was involved in. Because he looked at it and said, this isn't right. There's something wrong about this. But, the culture of his day, you've got to realize, the entire economy around him was based on this practice of mercenary soldiers. And, the Pope endorsed it. The Pope wanted these mercenary soldiers, as many as he could get. And so he looked at it and said, no, this is not right. But, the culture and the Pope says it's all right. So, for the first time, he actually went back to Scripture. And being looking at scripture, I said, no, according to scripture, this is not right. And it was the first time that he really started using the scripture as being, this is a source of truth. Not the Pope, not the church, not tradition, but the Bible as being the source of truth. So, first, inclination there. Now, as he was talking about that, as he was preaching against the mercenary trade, he became rather unpopular in that area. And so he ended up moving to Isidelm. And he didn't spend that much time here, but a couple of things happened here. This is where you start to see some Reformed thinking going on in him, because he moved to a completely different style of preaching. The preaching of that day was either they would take a text of scripture and read into it some extremely obscure meanings so that they could preach whatever they felt like out of it. They'd search for all these hidden meanings in the scripture. Or they had these extremely fanciful myths that they would go based on and preach on those. Or it might just be a moral lesson of some sort. That was the sermon, if you want to call it that, of the day. He started using the Bible, and because he could actually read, most priests of the day did not have the ability to read the Bible. They couldn't read what was going on there, so they just read commentaries on the Bible, what other people said. So, he actually had the ability, so he began preaching straight from the Bible, using the simple meaning that he saw in there. And this sounds pretty basic, nothing really revolutionary. But in the day, this was revolutionary. This was huge. In fact, he started this type of preaching before Luther did, long before Calvin did. This was a trademark. He was an amazing preacher, and he gained quite a bit of hearing. This style of preaching would later be refined by Calvin, and then later on be refined by—Mark, what's the early Puritan who wrote Art of Prophesying? Perkins. Perkins. Yes. William Perkins. There we go. Yes, William Perkins, who kind of set up and organized what we would call a sermon today, where you look at the text, try to understand the meaning of the text, where you pull out of it and explain it, exegete it, and then come up with some application for the people that are listening. That's the model, and Zwingli was the first person to really use that rough model. So he was a pioneer of our sermons today. But this became very popular. His preaching became very popular because of this style of preaching. Now another thing that came on is he encountered the Tetzel of Switzerland. Now remember Tetzel was the extremely good salesman that was employed by Pope Leo to go into Saxony to sell the special indulgences to raise money for St. Peter's. And it was in Saxony that Tetzel ran into Luther. And it was that confrontation that actually produced Luther to start to think, and he posted those 95 theses, or questions, to discuss on this issue. But there's another guy here, Bernard Sampson, who was selling indulgences. Zwingli didn't post some questions about it. He immediately saw what this was, looked at the Bible and said, no, this is not right. And he began preaching. And basically, he just preached Samson right out of town. He could not sell a thing in that town. His preaching was so strong on the issue. So, you see him starting to encounter more and more in the church that he saw there was a problem. In 1519, Because of his popularity, he was asked to come to the large church in Zurich. Now, a couple of interesting things happened along the way with this. One, as he was a candidate for that position, he was accused of having an affair with this woman in his previous location. What was interesting about it is that he confessed to it. But he didn't just confess to that. He said, no, this is a long-standing pattern with me. I have struggled with this wherever I have gone. I have tried as hard as I can to stop it, but there has been a whole string of failures. He began just laying this out there, saying, this is something that I struggle with. This is a problem for me. And, of course, The priests were required to have a vow of chastity, but yet he's laying this out there and saying, this is the struggle that I have, and just confessed it openly to them. It ended up actually not being that big of an issue for him taking the post because the other candidate who was trying to get into this thing was actually living with a woman that had six children by her. It seems strange, but this was actually an extremely widespread practice that priests had concubines. They weren't allowed to actually marry, but Even though they had this vow of chastity, there was actually rules in the church in many places where, okay, you have the stipend. Unless you have a concubine, then you get this much more. And if you have children, then you... They planned for it. This was a horrible practice that they had, but they realized this is not working because these men struggled immensely with this. And so it became an issue later on in life as well. But something else happened here. As he arrived, the leaders in Zurich sat him down and said, OK, your job, what we're bringing you in for, here's what you're supposed to do. We want you to fill the church coffers. We want you to, in a sense, be a bill collector with a pulpit. We want to make sure we're going to judge you based on how much money you're able to raise. He listened to them and said, well, okay, I have other ideas. I'm going to preach the gospel. I'm going to share Christ. I'm going to start in the book of Matthew and preach straight through. And that's what he did. He started at that point and just started preaching straight through. He ended up preaching through the entire, before his death, the entire New Testament except for Revelation. But this was, again, this was a extremely radical concept in his day to actually have sequential expository preaching. But again, he was an amazing preacher, and he became very popular through this. Now, a little bit over a year into his ministry there, something very interesting happens, and that is the plague hits Europe. Now, in that day and age, there was almost nothing worse that you could hear than that the plague has struck your hometown. A number of years earlier, the plague had wiped out a third of the population of Europe as a whole. When the plague hits your town, you could easily expect to lose 50% of the people in your town to death. That's not counting the people who left. It was disastrous. If you happen to be, the odds weren't very good, but if you happen to be one of the survivors, you can expect that 50% of your friends and family would be dead. And you'd have to go through that. So it was just horrendous news. Now, let's think about the picture here. And I thought, okay, should I put a picture of the black plague and some of the wood carvings around that? But I put a picture here of Zwingli as a pastor. Because this is where you start to see the true colors of the man. So Zwingli, at the time, was on vacation in another city, resting, when he received word that Zurich had had the outbreak of the plague. Now, when they did that, they kind of closed down a town to isolate the plague, and almost anyone who said, oh, thank God, I'm not there, and stayed away. But Zwingli against the advice of his friends, immediately goes back to Zurich. Now, this pastor's heart, to understand Zwingli, you have to understand him as having a pastor's heart. Because it affects all that he does. Back with the mercenary issue, Yes, he was a patriot in the sense that he was concerned about his country, but what he saw was, he saw the destruction that happened in the lives of his sheep, of his congregation. He said, this isn't right. Look at what's happening to these families. Look at what's happening to these men. Look at what's happening to, not just if they die, but look at all the damage and carnage they are wrecking. This is not right. He was concerned for his sheep. And that led him to go to the scriptures and say, what does the scriptures say about this? When it came to the Issue of indulgences. Same thing. He looked at it and said, no, this is destructive in the lives of my sheep. Therefore, let's go back and see what scripture has to say about it. But here, the plague hits Europe. He goes back there, and he starts to nurse the sick, to bury the dead, to comfort the families. They're there. Showing this pastor's heart for his flock. Now, he also did contract the Black Plague. And that would most commonly result in death. He was on death's door for an extended period of time. He did recover. And it's interesting, because as he recovered, one person who was writing on it said, there seems to be a change in the man where he started to take things very seriously. I mean, before he was a preacher, but now all of a sudden he's like, there's an urgency to this man. There's an urgency in his preaching. There's an urgency in his writing. There's an urgency to what he's doing here. So, you need to understand him as a pastor, because it's going to come up again and again that his heart as a pastor affects what he does. Contrast him real quick with Luther, who was a monk, a scholar, and a professor, who led a Reformation movement but was never really truly just a pastor of a flock. He did to some extent later on in years, but he was always a much bigger picture than that. He was never as closely intertwined with a flock. Calvin, Calvin as a man, all Calvin wanted, Calvin was a scholar, and Calvin wanted to lead a quiet life away from everybody so he could write and study. Now, he happened to be in a church in Geneva, and this man, Favel, just basically pounced on him and twisted his arm and said, no, you are called to be a pastor here. And so he did it very reluctantly. He became a pastor very reluctantly. And you can see the pastor's heart in him, but it's just a very reluctance on his part to become a pastor. But with Zwingli, this defines much of who he is, is he is a pastor. So, that's the plague. And then there is the Affair of the Sausages. Kind of sounds like it should be a book title. The Affair of the Sausages. We trace the Reformation in Germany, the start date of the Reformation in Germany, back to what? 1517, what happened? Exactly. That's kind of the trigger point of the Reformation in Germany. This was the trigger point of Switzerland. And what it was, was this one man who owned a print shop, had a number of workers there, and they were working on getting this one large job completed, and the workers were losing energy. So he cooked up some sausages and served it to them. Sounds pretty innocuous, right? except that this happened to be during Lent. It doesn't seem like it would be that big of a deal today, but back then this would be the equivalent of, say, burning the American flag. It's a dominant statement and it was going to attract a lot of attention if you did this. So, these men were brought up before the government for having eaten sausage during Lent. Here's the interesting thing, is that Zwingli happened to be staying at that man's house at the time of the affair of the sausages. He didn't eat anything, but he was there. And so when this came up before the government, he began preaching that, again, he went back to scriptures and said, where is Lent in scripture? And he came back and said, this is not a scriptural thing. We have Christian liberty in this issue. He began preaching on Christian liberty and how we have liberty on these issues. How we do not have to follow traditions. But we have to follow what the Bible says. And his arguing won the day, as being an excellent preacher. But this one issue started this whole trigger, because previously he'd been talking a lot about some different excesses of the Church, indulgences, where there were problems, stuff like that. But now he started to look at the basic elements of the Church tradition, saying, wait a minute, There's something not right here. This isn't the way that the Bible says it. So, this led to a number of, I'll call them debates, with the government of Zurich, where he basically led the way through these debates and convinced everyone that there was reforms that were needed. And the government went right along with it. It was a very, very organized, Very disciplined. Everyone was involved in this reform. The government, the trade people, and the church leadership. They're all involved in this thing. They removed the images from the church. They replaced the mass. All pastors were required to preach directly from the Bible. This was of great concern to them because most of them couldn't read it. But that ended up kind of weeding out a lot of them. The wealth of the church, they took all those ornaments and the gold and the silver and melted it down and that became something that they would give to the poor. Remember, how did the church gather all that gold? From the poor, who were constantly putting money in, keeping them poor. And worship became now a preaching and prayer service without music. just a number of significant changes in this area. And all this happened in an extremely short time, but very well organized, and everyone was involved in it. So, there were other things on there. One of the other things was that in 1524, Zwingli publicly marries Anna Reinhardt. Now, he had I guess you could call it secretly married her quite a few years earlier, and they were living together this entire time. In fact, he had published a pamphlet on this issue saying, the church should allow the clergy to marry, or at least wink at it. saying, at least just allow us to do this, because it's not healthy. But at this point in time, he publicly marries Anna Reinhart, and this triggers a whole bunch of other people, of course, getting married, other clergy in the area, who had already been living with women, and they just changed that entire practice completely. Now, something else happened here along the way. This is one of those chapters that you wish you didn't have to cover. But here is this radical reformer, Zwingli, who in an amazingly short amount of time transformed and moved the church from here way over here. And did it in a very organized, disciplined way. But there are men who were disciples of Zwingli would begin saying, no, we need to go further. And it was interesting because Zwingli taught very clearly that the Bible alone is our authority. And everyone agreed with him. He says, yes, that's right. And he also taught that the Christianity does not consist of church membership, but it is a personal relationship with Christ. Some basic things he taught there. Now, these men, They believed it, but there were some of them who kind of took this idea and took it to its logical conclusion in a number of areas. And they basically came back and said, okay, Zwingli, you're right. Christianity is a personal relationship with Christ. But most of your church members don't have this kind of relationship. How does this work? They came back and said, yes, you're right. We shouldn't follow the traditions of men. We should rely on scripture alone. But where do you see in scripture that the church and the state should be working together on these issues? A couple of things to note is that In the mindset of the day, this is a little foreign to our concept today, because we have this idea of, you know, there's government and there's church, but in the day, there was this idea that this was how things worked, is you had to have government actually enforcing the edicts of the church, and there was this combination, basically a hand-in-glove relationship between government and the church. They worked together constantly. And it was, for instance, you gained citizenship, in the US you gained citizenship by being born here. In those countries, you gain citizenship by being baptized into the church. That was your birth certificate, in a sense. When the church disciplined or excommunicated somebody, it was the government that actually carried it out, carried out the punishment. Interestingly, the reformers were the ones who handed off to the government the role of licensing marriage. We want you to be involved in marriage. We want you to license marriage. We'll perform the ceremony, but it's really up to you. The government, they saw the government as being in the role of making sure that there was no heresy taught in the churches. You think about a little heavy-handed government and how that could go wrong. I mean, in this situation, they both used it for good, because one of the reforms they had is, all pastors, you are required to preach directly from the Bible. Sounds good. And it did do some good stuff, but you could see where that would go in a really bad direction very quickly. So, this was this hand-in-glove relationship that they had between church and state. And these are looking at it and saying, no, where do you see this in Scripture? Where do you see that they should be doing this in Scripture, this type of setup? So, and by the way, these men that you see here go under the label of Anabaptists. Now, the Anabaptists were this very diverse group. There is no one group of Anabaptists. I mean, there's all kinds of different groups out there. And they're actually rather misnamed, because you think of them, Anabaptists, well that means they're re-baptizing, that means their main distinctive is re-baptism. Not so. Their main distinctive, if you want to understand the Anabaptists, don't look at their theology around baptism, look at their theology around how they view authority. That is this true distinctive of the Anabaptist groups. All of them have different views on it, all of them take it to some different extremes in many cases, but that was the distinction there. But they were named Anabaptists so that they would be the common enemy of both the Protestant and the Catholic Church. And so they got it from both sides. But these men came, and by the way, there were some really extreme fringes of the Anabaptist movement. But these men here, while they had some extreme views, they were pretty much very conservative. Very conservative Anabaptists came out of Zurich. And so these men began talking about and asking these questions of Zwingli. Well, Zwingli, in trying to answer them, struggled with trying to answer them from Scripture. So he did the worst possible thing. He went back to Constantine, the Roman emperor who converted to Christianity, who institutionalized Christianity, who made this relationship between government and church, and that had lasted for the last thousand years. He went back to that and said, look, this has been a church tradition for this long. It must be right. Does that argument sound familiar? This is the very type of argumentation that he has been arguing against. for all these years, saying, no, church tradition is not the authority. It's not what we've done for so many years that we have to keep on doing. We have to look at the scripture and say, what does the scripture say about this? And so he kept on, but that was the only defense he could come up with, and because he so desired, this church-state relationship, Of course, it comes out of the Catholic Church who had this relationship, but even Luther, who had this very cozy relationship with Frederick of Saxony, a rather powerful and politically well-connected man who was Luther's protector. So they had this relationship there that was very good, and so Luther didn't have to worry that much about State, because State always had his back. You've got Calvin, who, although he argued at times and had disputes with the governing body at Geneva, he worked with them extensively. It was those guys who implemented his reforms. They worked together quite a bit. So, both these reformers had a lot of church stake. And then you've got Zwingli. Zwingli, I could say, he was probably the most skilled politician of any of the Reformers, because he had an amazingly good relationship with the local government. They worked together extremely well. So a very, very positive relationship, working relationship there. So all the Reformers had this relationship with government, but these men are coming along and saying, wait a minute, where do you see this in Scripture? And he had no basis. So we went back to, well, it's church tradition. This is what we've always done. This is what we should be doing today. And unfortunately, they kept on talking. And he handed them over and talked to the government and said, you guys need to take care of these people. They're talking heresy. They were brought up in trial. He was one of the ones who testified against them. and they were executed. And Zwingli, although he did not do the execution, he was there as Saul of Tarsus holding the cloaks of those who executed them. This plaque here is on the river that goes through Zurich, and it's where they took these men. If you notice these men, you see a commonality between them, their death date, It's all in a very short period of time. They would take these men and they said, oh, you like water? Okay. They put them in a sack and tossed them in the river. And this was the spot, this plaque marks the spot where they were tossed in the river there. So, extremely sad part of the Reformation there in Zurich. But some of these men, other men, just continued on and left and went elsewhere. By the way, if anybody has any questions, just go ahead and interrupt at any point in time. Yes? I've never heard an explanation of that, but that does make sense. It does make sense, because they worked extensively with the government in the local area. It was a government-run reform, in many respects. So, that's a very good point. Okay, so now we've reached the point, this is the thing that most people know Zwingli for, the Marburg Colloquy. This was where Zwingli and Luther came together and debated issues. A little bit of background to this thing. As I said, there is this church and state relationship that's going on here, and Luther had this very strong protector. And he also had allies throughout Germany, which was a rather powerful area. Zwingli, on the other hand, was a part of a very small Swiss canton. They were small, independent, they would be similar in some ways to our counties in size and scope. They had a similar independent government that would work there. And so each of these cantons had their own government. So he was part of this canton, And they needed allies. They needed to work together because they were in danger of, there was both other nations, France and others, who were trying to bring them back to Catholicism at the point of the sword, but even some of the other Cantons, who were still Catholic, were threatening to come and take them back to Catholicism at the point of the sword. Some men saw, hey, there's these two groups, and by the way, it's interesting, Zwingli and Luther had almost no impact on each other. It wasn't until Luther debated Eck that Zwingli even heard of Luther. And Zwingli had been enacting reforms, actually, he'd been enacting minor reforms before Luther posted the Ninety-Five Theses. They were very independent of each other, but people looked at it and said, there's these two groups, we should get them together to form an alliance. So they set this up, the Marburg Colloquy. I won't go into the whole debate, but basically they came up with 15 points that they were going to talk about. They got through 14 of them. They said, we are in complete and utter agreement on this one. They got to the 15th one and it bogged down. That issue was the Lord's Table and the presence of Christ in the Lord's Table. Now, this seems like kind of a minor issue to us. It's not that big of a deal, but you've got to realize to them at the time, the whole idea of salvation, the relationship between God and man, and the role of the Church were wrapped up in this one question. It was a very significant question for them. It was not a minor detail that they were fighting about. There was something very significant for them and their understanding at the time. So, they went through this and Luther, I won't go through the whole background, but Luther basically said, his argument is, the Bible says, this is my body. Therefore, it is my body. That was the entirety of his argument. That's it. He had nothing else. And he basically challenged Zwingli, saying, hey, can you prove to me by scripture that this is not his body? Can you show me in scripture where it says this is not his body? And you can't use reason, just show me in scripture where it's not his body. And so Zwingli came and said, you know, When Christ says, I am a vine, is he saying, I'm a plant, that's what I am, I'm a plant? No, he says, I am like a vine. When Joseph interprets the dream, he says the seven fat cows are seven years of plenty. Well, does that mean those cows are actual years? Or no, they represent seven years. This is the language of the Bible that they're using to say, no, this represents this. It's not an actual, this is my body. But Luther basically didn't respond to any of these arguments. He had no response at all. He just came back and it says he was just sitting there writing, this is my body, this is my... and that's all he would... his entire argument was that. rather unfortunate that they could not come to any sort of agreement. But what I want to talk about is actually two points on Zwingli from this. One, Zwingli walked into this having a very, very strong desire for an alliance with the Wittenbergers. Both from a political standpoint, from a church standpoint, and from a pastor's standpoint, he wanted an alliance with Luther. And yet he was a man who was unwilling to, even though he had great incentive to do so, he was unwilling to compromise on this issue. Now you can say, well, wasn't Luther Yes, he was, even though there was a great deal of stubbornness on his part, but he was unwilling to compromise. But Luther had very little incentive or desire. Luther walked into the whole thing with a great mistrust of both the Swiss and of Zwingli as well, because of an enemy, someone that disagreed with Luther. You've got to realize, Luther, if you disagree with Luther, you were the enemy. There was nothing else to say about it. And so there's another man who came in, but he'd been friends with Zwingli, and so Luther said, well, if you're friends with him, you can't be any good. Zwingli would not compromise on this issue, even though it was a great advantage to him. But the other point I find very interesting here is the reaction upon leaving this meeting. Because Luther left this meeting, he refused to even shake Zwingli's hand. He walked away saying, that man is of another spirit. And Miller was saying, I don't even think that man is a saint. If he doesn't believe in consubstantiation, he can't be saved. Zwingli left this meeting crying. He had a great love and retained that great love for Luther. When Luther later heard about Zwingli's death, Luther's response was basically, well, he had it coming. Not a very generous spirit, in that respect. Zwingli, on the other hand, still expressed his respect and love for Luther and for what the Wittenbergers were doing. And he seems to have hit this point that is so hard to hit of being willing to stand for the truth, uncompromising, stand for the truth, and yet to love those who disagree with you. So often in the Church, we mess up on this one. We say, if you disagree, you must be wrong. We can't be friends. But he seems to hit this point very well. In some ways, this is considered to be a failure on his part, this meeting, where he failed to form an alliance. In some ways, I think this is one of his shining examples, his shining moments, where he would not compromise, and yet he loved them just the same. So, one last thing here that comes up. is there was Southern Cantons, who were still Catholic, and they basically started making overtures of war. And so the Northern Cantons banded together and started to march on them. On the way, though, one of the Cantons brokered a deal where they weren't going to go to war with them, they were going to have an embargo of these Southern Cantons. Zwingli was extremely strongly against this. He said, no, this is not right. He said, if we do this embargo, it's not going to be soldiers who die. It's going to be women and children who die. They're going to be starved. He said, and plus, on top of that, what else can make a man so strongly willing to fight, other than seeing his starving family? What can gain so much sympathy from other nations around, so they will come to the aid of a starving group of Catholics? But he did not win the day on this argument, and it was a year later that the Southern Cantons, who again, they played off the sympathy, they had a whole bunch of other troops, and they marched on the Northern ones. And the Northern ones, knowing they were massively outnumbered, still went out to war, and Zwingli went out with them. Zwingli is interesting in how this statue of Zwingli, today, as you can see, shows him with the Bible and holding a sword. He was a patriot and he was a pastor. And so he, knowing the odds against him, against the advice of friends, went out with the troops. And on the fields of Capelle, he died there. Now, he did appoint a successor. in Zurich, Heinrich Bollinger, who carried on very, very capably. But he died at the age of 47, I believe. But his impact is not, you don't see it as big as, say, there are Lutherans and then there are Calvinists There are no Zwinglians. But his impact was very significant throughout the life of Calvin, who came later, and just even in Zurich, with the continuation of John Oculopatius and Heinrich Bollinger. So, a very good legacy that he's left us, and a very good model, in some respects, of just how much he went back to the Word. So, any questions on him? I don't know. I can tell you that in some of his arguments with it, he came to some agreement. I mean, his arguments with the Anabaptists, the argument was not anywhere near as strong on the issue of baptism. He did not argue with him on that. It was the issue of church government relating to, that was where he stuck with them. He did not seem to have that much problem. I don't know how much he was for it, but he didn't seem to have a problem with them re-baptizing them. So, I don't know if that's a good answer for that. I haven't read enough of his writing to say that. But he was one of the ones who spoke out least against this idea of re-baptizing. Good question. Anything else? Okay, Joe, could you close the door?