text: I went back and read the "Is the Pope Catholic" piece at First Things. IMO there is one passage (among many) that potentially gets at the root of the problem--which can essentially be chalked up to our forefather's inclination toward medieval ritualism:
  
  In that piece, the author claims: "They [sacraments] are instruments of grace by which God communicates to us his own life through participation in our Lord Jesus Christ. They are not rewards for goodness, but the means of sharing in the God who is good. That is why they are holy sacraments, and it is their very holiness that makes them the object of attack."
  
  By all means, this is what the RCC teaches... but why? In the early going there was only baptism and Eucharist, why the need to add to what the apostles taught? Was it that important to "develop" additional sacraments and enshrine them in "infallible" doctrine? Are sacraments really "holy" as the author suggests, or is that a piece of medieval culture which needs retooling?