He targeted the attire and corruption of the Pope and the church’s clergy by stating that their attire, among other things, is hypocritical in the eyes of the Lord (Zwingli). Zwingli also targeted specific interpretations of the Catholic church, arguing that their understanding of practices, such as mass, were plagued with human insertion, and that mass specifically should be viewed as a remembrance of what Jesus sacrificed for us. In regard to the Catholic church’s view on communication with God, Zwingli affirmed that Christ is the only mediator between humans and God; this argument targeted the use of saints and drove in the fact that they are not needed to communicate to God or to receive His …show more content…
Because of these articles, Zurich was able to break away from the Catholic church and do away with its human-corrupted faith; this made it so Christians could solely focus on God and His word alone. His points backed by the Bible are all important, but at one point he veers off and talks about what is not in the Bible, government. These points are clarified as being used to enforce what the Bible has made clear and true, though the actual means of rulemaking, governing, and regulating are not specified in the Bible; this is why I personally disagree with Zwingli’s stance on government. God did not specify government in the Bible, and I think it is wrong to state that one form of government is enforced by God, because in fact there are none that we know of that are. Besides his stance on government, Zwingli could be seen as a preacher of only the word of God to unsaved