he people and with their aid. By it and
through it, also, the democratic tendency in political life attained
the victory. Toward the close of the year 1527, no more traces of the
activity of a Secret Council are to be found; all business of any
importance had to be brought from the Small before the Great Council,
from whence the people were generally informed of it, and not seldom
asked for their opinion. In particular emergencies, indeed, the Great
Council clothed some of its members with dictatorial power, but only
for a few weeks and under public accountability. But the more
democratic the form of political life becomes, just so much the more
indispensable are culture and the religious elevation of the people.
The strengthening of a sense of right demands as a necessary
counterpoise, an exalted sense of duty. Thus state and church go
together, indissoluble in their mutual relations, in consequence of
which every commotion in the sphere of one, reacts inevitably on that
of the other; but whilst the authority of the state rests upon law and
its severe administration, the power of the church ought to be grounded
only upon conviction, faith, freedom and love, for these are the
requirements as well as the fundamental doctrines of the Gospel. In a
democracy the law must be a most complete defence against the wicked;
the Gospel the basis of all improvement. As the principles of the
church and of the state differ in this way, so do they also in the mode
of their use. This difference was clearly apprehended by Zwingli. We
see it above. The ecclesiastical and political reforms of Zurich had
shaped themselves according to these principles. In all religious
matters, conviction was first sought; in all political, proof that the
letter of the law would justify or demand it, was sufficient. Whatever
may be the relation of the church to the state in other forms of
government, this must continue the most suitable for a democracy. Bern,
on the other hand, was never democratic. It is true, indeed, that even
here ecclesiastical reform was only possible by the removal of some of
the most influential heads of the aristocracy, which, however, did not
succumb as completely as in Zurich, so that even the friends of the
Reformation and of Zwingli, who form the middle class, worked their way
into the government, accepted partly from necessity and partly of their
own accord, aristocratic forms and principles. The closer the
connection between Be