AHC/WI : Zwinglism as third branch of Protestantism

How could we change early Reform history in order to retain Zwingli's views as a third branch of Protestantism, along with Lutherianism and Calvinism (if Calvinism or any Calvinist-equivalent appears as a strong branch ITTL, of course)?

What would be the consequences of Zwingli's semi-anabatism (reel or percieved), his rejection of the Revelations (Apocalypse) part of the Bible, his partial rejection of classical Augustinism, and relatively more liberal stance on religious and institutional matters, emerging as not as an inspiration of modern Protestantism, but as much distinct from other branches, than Calvinist are from Lutheran churches (meaning, not wholly separated and antagonizing, but with a religious and identitarian difference)?

What would change in Europe : greater/similar/smaller expension of the Reform?
 
I'm not familiar with the consensus or its context. What is what about? The reality or symbolism of eucharist? A third position?

See https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Consensus_Tigurinus for a summary. See https://books.google.com/books?id=Vknr2VQSif8C&pg=PA54 for an argument that it was not an unmitigated victory for either Calvin or Bullinger but a "genuine intra-Reformed ecumenical achievement." The same essay concludes that the *Consensus,* while it bound Swiss Reformers (Zwinglian and Calvinist) closer together, also drove a greater wedge between the Reformed and the Lutheran communities (the latter being a result Calvin did not want and was unhappy about).
 
In my opinion it depends on what people convert to Zwinglianism. If it is a bunch of catholics, who couldn't find what they were looking for in other protestant faiths, but could find it in Zwinglianism, it would weaken catholisism and strengthen protestantism. Personaly I find that doubtfull to happen. I think most catholics who wanted (or could) convert did. I don't see suddenly Italy or Spain go protestant because of this.

You could have just some members of the less popular forms of protestantism go Zwinglian, for example a large part of the anabaptists. In that case it wouldn't matter much, like the anabaptists didn't matter much OTL.

Possibly you couldhave one of the Calvinist countries go Zwinglian. Maybe Switserland, or Scotland, or the Netherlands go Zwinglian instead of Calvinist. That would be interesting, but in the end I don't think it matters much. Although the Netherlands had enough coud in the early 17th century, that it would probably mean that small parts of Germany would go Zwinglian too,because of Dutch influence. If it would be the Hugenots, who would become Zwinglians, instead of Calvinist, I fear that would be bad for them. They would mostly isolate themselves within Europe, Since now the Dutch Calvinsit would care significantly less for them. If we would still be getting something a similar as the edict of Fontainebleau they would have less places to go to than OTL.

Lastly and probably most likely would be that some Lutherans become Zwinglians. Thatw would probably weaken the protestant course, because of all the infighting that often happened between protestants. Still probably not enough for protestantism tocompletely lose out.

Most likely we get a combination of these scenarios. In the most interestind scenario we see some parts of Germany go Zwinglian instead of Lutheran. Since it is close to Anabaptism (I don't know if it is, but you mention it,so perhaps it is), several anabaptist decide to go Zwinglian, instead of remaining a (almost prosecuted) minority. After the 30-year war (or its equivalent) Zwinglianism is recognised as one of the branches of protestantism, like Lutheranism and Calvinism. Now there are a couple of areas in Germany that are Zwinglian, instead of Lutheran or Calvinist. In the Netherlands there are some Zwinglian minorities, just like there are Catholic, Lutheran, Anabaptist, Jewish and Remonstrant minorities. A similar situation exists in other countries like england or Switserland etc.

End result: more religious diversity.
 
@David T, @pompejus

Thanks for these informative posts : If I understand your points correctly, rather than having three distinct main branches of Protestantism, we'd rather have a heterogeneous spectrum of distinct but comptatible schools (possibly borrowing from each other), not unlike Sunni Islam?

What would be the consequences of some German states going Zwinglian ITTL?

If it would be the Hugenots, who would become Zwinglians, instead of Calvinist, I fear that would be bad for them. They would mostly isolate themselves within Europe
I don't know : if Zwinglianism (that would be one rad-named denomination BTW) manages to become its own branch, wouldn't one of the first areas to be considered as such be Switzerland where it appeared?
Eventually, it depends how much distinct Protestant branches would be : a not that insignificant part of the relative tolerence French Protestants recieved in the XVIIth century was diplomatically motivated, especially for treating with England. On the other hand, a stronger continuity and inter-school exchanges might help French Protestantism to avoid the somewhat dogmatic reaction it knew in late XVIIth, which certainly didn't helped.

Since it is close to Anabaptism (I don't know if it is, but you mention it,so perhaps it is)
To be honest, I only saw it was considered closer to Anabatism than Lutherianism or Calvinism, hence why I said "percieved semi-anabatism" : it's possible that is not, but I'm a bit lost on theological differences in early Reformation.
 
I don't know : if Zwinglianism (that would be one rad-named denomination BTW) manages to become its own branch, wouldn't one of the first areas to be considered as such be Switzerland where it appeared?
My first reaction was that Calvin himself was Swiss too, but than I checked and found out he was actualy French and only moved to Switserland, well Geneva, which wasn't even Swiss at that time. So yes, you are right. Switserland is the most likely country to go Zwinglian and with Calvin French I think he would have more influence in France (and the Low countries), like OTL.




Thanks for these informative posts : If I understand your points correctly, rather than having three distinct main branches of Protestantism, we'd rather have a heterogeneous spectrum of distinct but comptatible schools (possibly borrowing from each other), not unlike Sunni Islam?
Well sort off. You already had several branches of protestantism in Europe. There was Anglicanism, Lutheranism and Calvinism. But also smaller branches like Anabaptism and remonstrantism (at least in the Netherlands). I don't think you can speak about two main branches of protestantism, especially as time continues and new directions spilt from the main branches or even fused (the current Protestant church of the Netherlands, the main protestant branch is actualy afusion of 2 calvinist churches and the Lutheran churchof the Netherlands).



What would be the consequences of some German states going Zwinglian ITTL?

What I think might happen is roughly this: Switserland goes for a large part Zwinglian. Several Anabaptists around that area (like the precursors of the Amish) go Zwinglian too (not all though, you probably will have people who remain Anabaptists, like the Mennonites around the Netherlands). A couple of German princes feel attracted to Zwinglianism and also go Zwinglian. The Low Countries (to use an anachronistic term) go Calvinist, just like the protestants in France. They, like OTL, have enough cloud to convince several German princes to also go Calvinist. Most German protestants remain Lutheran, just like OTL. It has barely any effect on catholic princes. A variant of the Thirty year war takes place*. Assuming little butterflies (an unlikely assumption, see below) in the end a similar treaty is made and the German princes are allowed to choose the religion in their lands, now including Catholicism, Lutheranism, Calvinism and Zwinglianism.


*Actualy interesting butterflies could happen now. For example what if the ruler of the Palatinate is one of the princes that goes Zwinglian. That would change, or even butterfly away the start of the thirty year war. That said, a religious war in Germany was bound to happen.
 
Zwingli was not semi-anabaptist. He was living in an environment where many anabaptist groups developed, but he was as firmly on the magisterial side of the reformation as Luther and Calvin, while basically all anabaptist groups were grassroots revolutionaries with a more or less anarcho-theocratic agenda. It was just that the Swiss city states were a different background against which being a magisterial reformer meant something different from Luther`s princely environment.

I agree with the opinion stated before on this thread that, should Zwingli and Calvin have disagreed more clearly e.g. on the matter of transsubstantiation, then we would be facing more of a continuum of Protestant views rather than the relatively sharp division between "Reformierte" and "Lutheraner". If that ultimately meant more cohesion in the face of politico-military opposition, or less, is still open, though.
 
Top