Talk:Huldrych Zwingli/Archive 1

Archive 1

Schaff teference

Schaff is an excellent resource and public domain. But as it is available on the net, it might be better to link to it - just a suggestion. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 195.49.27.71 (talk • contribs) 18:51, 5 March 2003

Yes, this is true. (70.176.9.7 (talk) 08:24, 4 May 2008 (UTC))

Info at [1]

A lot of information at http://16.1911encyclopedia.org/Z/ZW/ZWINGLI.htm not used. --OldakQuill 17:37, 10 May 2004 (UTC)

Can s/o compare Calvin & Zwingli - not just Zwingli & Luther

Both John Calvin and Ulrich Zwingli contributed to the Reformed Churches so some analysis would be of value. Paul foord 08:41, 14 May 2005 (UTC)

doctor biblicus

I can guess what this means, but it might be better to explain it. The immediate searches I get on it are in the exact same context and give me no more confidence in my guess, otherwise I would update. John (Jwy) 23:20, 4 January 2006 (UTC)

Merging "Theology: sacraments and covenants (Zwingli versus Luther)" with "Theology of Zwingli" article

I am against it. It seems like there should be mention of Zwinglian sacramantology in this article, as this part of his legacy is quite notable. Notthe9 16:23, 21 January 2006 (UTC)

I agree that this article should have at least a summary of Zwingli's view and how it differs from the other Reformers' views, and I don't think the merge would remove all mention of his theological legacy. The article on Zwingli's theology can and should cover it in greater depth, however. --Flex 19:17, 7 February 2006 (UTC)

marriage date conflict

Ulrich Zwingli's wedding date is April 2, 1524 at Wikipedia and other sources but is July 2, 1524 in Catholic Encyclopedia and a few others.

This wedding was announced publicly on one of these dates.

It would be nice to find actually document of announcement or some logical explanation of the difference. Daytrivia 01:55, 12 October 2006 (UTC)

Zwingli and politics

I know nothing about this topic, and the sedond paragraph of this sectoin is confusing. It sounds like it was written in the jargon of serious protestent discourse.

I am going to attempt a "layman's" rewrite. If my rewrite is mistaken, please attempt a better one.

Nwbeeson 15:05, 9 January 2007 (UTC)

There is no source for this quote: "It is well that Zwingli, Carlstadt and Pellican lie dead on the battlefield, for otherwise we could not have kept the Landgrave, Strasbourg and others of our neighbors. Oh, what a triumph this is, that they have perished. How well God knows his business."

There is no primary source mentioning Luther wrote that, and the one who edit the article didn't provide the source too, whether it is primary or secondary. The only things slightly similar comes from the Roman Catholic historian Hartmann Grisar in his work called "Luther":

Luther was in high glee when news of Zwingli's death reached him. He said: "God knows the thoughts of the heart. It is well that Zwingli, Carlstadt, and Pellicanus lie dead on the battle-field, for otherwise we could not have retained the Landgrave, Strasburg and other of our neighbours [true to our doctrine]. Oh, what a triumph is this, that they have perished! God indeed knows His business well." "Luther", by Grisar

However, Grisar is stating his opinion in most of the time and didn't provide where did he get that information. If you research in one of the german editions of the Tabletalk, the one from Schlaginhaufen, you might find the information of Zwingli, Carlstadt and Pellicanus' deathes at Kappel, but even so the information is uncorrect: except from Zwingli none of these died at the battle. I will correct the article with the propper quotings regarding Luther

Pedrogaiao 15:25, 7 Setemper 2017 (UTC)

Clarification

The material from the Catholic Encyclopedia linked at the bottom of the article states that Zwingli was the third of eight sons and the top section of the article claims that he was the seventh of eight. Someone should get this page to agree with itself, otherwise people will continue to be confused, just as i am in my ignorance —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 67.186.133.125 (talk) 17:51, 10 February 2007 (UTC).

Suggested restructure

I would recommend starting with the section "Zwingli's life", i.e., his biography, and then following with his contribution to the Reformation. --RelHistBuff 10:12, 13 October 2007 (UTC)

I changed the order of the sections as above. I have gathered several books on Zwingli and unless there are any objections, I would like to proceed on a rewrite. --RelHistBuff 13:19, 31 October 2007 (UTC)

Bolded Text: Music?

Does the text that he didn't dislike music need to be bolded? It feels out of flow and un-encyclopedic.Gordon CSA (talk) 23:15, 28 November 2007 (UTC)

New article Theology of Huldrych Zwingli

I have created a new article, Theology of Huldrych Zwingli, because I would like to make a serious expansion of the theology section in the Huldrych Zwingli article using the Stephens reference. At the same time, I noticed the Huldrych Zwingli article is already becoming quite large just covering his biography and adding the theology info would make this article quite cumbersome. There is information of his theology sprinkled throughout this article (such as in the Marburg section, I am expanding it now). Therefore I would like to remove the theology section here to be replaced by the new article. Anyone have any thoughts on this? --RelHistBuff (talk) 10:56, 31 January 2008 (UTC)

Sounds like a good application of WP:SUMMARY. Keep up the good work! --Flex (talk/contribs) 21:55, 31 January 2008 (UTC)

My work plan is as follows:

1. Rewrite and cite the Kappel Wars section
2. Rewrite and cite the Legacy section
3. Rewrite and cite the Theology section trying to reduce it to about two paragraphs
4. Submit article to WP:PR, which will take some time to get a response
5. While waiting, work on the Theology of Huldrych Zwingli article
6. After the peer review, go through citations/sources again
7. Proofread, copyedit, ask for separate reviews, check with WP:MOS
8. Submit to FAC

--RelHistBuff (talk) 08:20, 1 February 2008 (UTC)

excellent plan. Thanks for adopting this article .dab (𒁳) 12:29, 1 February 2008 (UTC)

I already see that I should add

3.1 Rewrite and expand lead section

I would like to remove the "Literary production" section. The complete list of works is around 200 items and it is rather difficult to pick out the best ones (for example for a "Selected works" section). Within the article itself, several works of Zwingli are already noted so I think there is no need to make a separate list of works unless someone wants to start a list-type article. --RelHistBuff (talk) 14:22, 1 February 2008 (UTC)