Tricky questions that most Catholics cant answer

[faithinjesus]

There are several points, that when pointed out, the Catholic in question (of the faith not the person) the person gets amazingly defensive and refuses to answer or only gives a generic answer. These questions are such things like the worship of Mary. It doesn’t matter how its worded, its worship. The worship of Mary wasn’t even accepted until prayer to Mary was accepted in 600AD. 600 years after the death of Jesus. That has no direct link to the bible. That is a dogma, and a dogma means a belief thought to be fact. But its not. 43 main doctrines were established after 300AD up until 1965. Thats a long time. Why add things to the religion AFTER the completion of the bible. The only phrase that the bible calls Mary is “blessed”. And even in that verse it only says she will be blessed among women. Not men. Also, the 2nd commandment, the original, which is in Hebrew, states not to have an carven images. So bowing and praying to a statue falls into that.

Another topic is the Last Supper. Called the Eucharist in the Catholic Church. The dogma is that the literal flesh and blood of Jesus Christ is in the bread and wine. IF that was to be true, that would be cannibalism. Plain and simply. Added to that, and this is why people should read the bible themselves and not depend on what others tell them, Christ spoke of that AS He broke the bread and poured the wine, thus showing that it was symbolic. He meant for us to remember Him when we did this act. “Do this in remembrance of Me”. He meant that He is the substance that we need for eternal life. Not eat my literal actual physical flesh. The only times that cannibalism is mentioned in the bible was as a punishment through famines.

Next is the assumption that Mary was sinless. Not true at all. Yes she does deserve merit because she did give birth to the physical God, however, she was not sinless. If she was, then why did she say in Luke 1:47 “And my spirit rejoiced in God my Savior”. Why did she need a savior if she had no sin to be saved of? Also, and this goes for the “infallibility” of the pope,
Romans 3:23, “For ALL have fallen short of the Glory of God”.
So we all fall short and we all sin. No one but Jesus was sinless. Also there is no support biblically that anyone is infallible. That seems like a ruse to cover the butts of Catholic leaders. So that if they make a mistake, they are covered. But then again, if he did have that, he wouldn’t make a bad decision, which Popes have.

The last, at least for this post, is the claim that the true church is the Catholic Church and the true bible is the Catholic bible. The first true bible was the Torah, as the Jews were way ahead of the Catholics. Jesus Himself was Jewish. He was not Catholic. Most people know that the original bible, Genesis to Revelation was written in Hebrew, Greek and Aramaic. So the claim that the change in the 10 commandments is because of numbering is wrong.

 

[puzzleannie]

I don’t suppose you care to post any reliable source for your fantastic allegations, a basic requisite to civil discussion on any topic. you are posing the question on the non-Catholic religion forum. does that mean you expect non-Catholics to answer questions about Catholic teaching? You mis-state Catholic teaching on your areas of concern completely, and your history is utterly unreliable. Should you care to visit the proper forum, apologetics, you will find your questions discussed on many, many threads where you can have your misapprehensions corrected. that is, if you are more than a passing visitor

 

[yellowbird]

I could actually answer all of your questions… (although you didn’t really ask questions… you more or less gave your opinions) but still… nothing tricky about them. Anyhow, I could… but I won’t because of that verse that talks about not casting my pearls…

 

[Believe_85]

hey faith,
This is about 10 threads in one. If you want to talk, pick one and start from there. Otherwise this thread is going to jump all over the place. Are you open minded, because your first paragraph comes across like you have heard the arguments and are more here to make a point about how you perceive Catholics to be manipulative idol worshipping liars.

What do you want to talk about first?

 

[tGette]

It would be nice to have this broken into many threads, because there are a lot of questions.

Off the bat…I will respond to a few:

There are several points, that when pointed out, the Catholic in question (of the faith not the person) the person gets amazingly defensive and refuses to answer or only gives a generic answer. These questions are such things like the worship of Mary. It doesn’t matter how its worded, its worship. The worship of Mary wasn’t even accepted until prayer to Mary was accepted in 600AD. 600 years after the death of Jesus. That has no direct link to the bible. That is a dogma, and a dogma means a belief thought to be fact. But its not. 43 main doctrines were established after 300AD up until 1965. Thats a long time. Why add things to the religion AFTER the completion of the bible. The only phrase that the bible calls Mary is “blessed”. And even in that verse it only says she will be blessed among women. Not men. Also, the 2nd commandment, the original, which is in Hebrew, states not to have an carven images. So bowing and praying to a statue falls into that.

In the Old Testament God instructs for images to be used:
Exodus 25:18-21
Numbers 21:8-9

Concerning your saying that no matter how we word it…we do “worship” Mary.
Could you please explain?

Does that mean a man worships his wife when he showers her with love? Sings her love songs? etc…

Another topic is the Last Supper. Called the Eucharist in the Catholic Church. The dogma is that the literal flesh and blood of Jesus Christ is in the bread and wine. IF that was to be true, that would be cannibalism. Plain and simply. Added to that, and this is why people should read the bible themselves and not depend on what others tell them, Christ spoke of that AS He broke the bread and poured the wine, thus showing that it was symbolic. He meant for us to remember Him when we did this act. “Do this in remembrance of Me”. He meant that He is the substance that we need for eternal life. Not eat my literal actual physical flesh. The only times that cannibalism is mentioned in the bible was as a punishment through famines.

The early Christians were accused of being cannibals…this shows that Christians have always believed in this concept.
Do you really think the Apostles were that confused? If it were symbolic…that teaching would have been from the very beginning.
Please read:
John 6:22-71

Next is the assumption that Mary was sinless. Not true at all. Yes she does deserve merit because she did give birth to the physical God, however, she was not sinless. If she was, then why did she say in Luke 1:47 “And my spirit rejoiced in God my Savior”. Why did she need a savior if she had no sin to be saved of? Also, and this goes for the “infallibility” of the pope,
Romans 3:23, “For ALL have fallen short of the Glory of God”.
So we all fall short and we all sin. No one but Jesus was sinless. Also there is no support biblically that anyone is infallible. That seems like a ruse to cover the butts of Catholic leaders. So that if they make a mistake, they are covered. But then again, if he did have that, he wouldn’t make a bad decision, which Popes have.

So much to cover…the infallible argument.
When Jesus gave Peter and the Apostles the power to “bind and loose”
Matthew 16:19

As far as Mary saying “I rejoice in God my savior”
It is because she was saved before birth.
Just like when a good parent raises their child right…they save them from falling into bad behaviors and leading down a wrong path.

The last, at least for this post, is the claim that the true church is the Catholic Church and the true bible is the Catholic bible. The first true bible was the Torah, as the Jews were way ahead of the Catholics. Jesus Himself was Jewish. He was not Catholic. Most people know that the original bible, Genesis to Revelation was written in Hebrew, Greek and Aramaic. So the claim that the change in the 10 commandments is because of numbering is wrong.

So then should we be Jewish?
The Commandments is simply a matter of how they are organized. When listed in the Bible they are identified as Ten, but when read in Scripture it looks like there are more than ten.
The fact that there are different “versions” of the 10 commandments is simply a matter of how they grouped them. It does not make either of them wrong actually.

And since you say the first Bible was the Torah…why do you use the New Testament…or do you not?

The Bible is a Catholic book because…the Holy Spirit guided the leaders of the Catholic faith to compile The Book. The same Church which holds to all the believes you are trying to refute.

This is a lot easier question than the “what came first the chicken or the egg?” question. The Church came first, because Jesus established a Church and eventually Scripture was compiled by those in the Church, who were inspired by the Holy Spirit.

 

[Tim_Kirchoff]

faith, I would be more than willing (and able) to answer those challenges. However, I advise you to do as Believe_85 said, and make a seperate thread for whatever you want to talk about.

But be careful- more than a few eager evangelists like yourself have been banned for being too “agressive”. Take it slowly, and be charitable.

 

[Gottle_of_Geer]

I don’t suppose you care to post any reliable source for your fantastic allegations, a basic requisite to civil discussion on any topic. you are posing the question on the non-Catholic religion forum. does that mean you expect non-Catholics to answer questions about Catholic teaching? You mis-state Catholic teaching on your areas of concern completely, and your history is utterly unreliable. Should you care to visit the proper forum, apologetics, you will find your questions discussed on many, many threads where you can have your misapprehensions corrected. that is, if you are more than a passing visitor

The source is Boettner’s - unrevised - list of “Roman Catholic Heresies and Inventions”, this is clear because:​

• 600 is the date given for one of them ( not for the veneration of the BVM, but for the use of Latin)
• the date of 300 is the earliest date listed
• the number of items other than the veneration of the BVM is 43; add that item, & you have 44. Which is the number of items in the first edition (of 1962), whereas the fifth edition (of 1989) has 45 items (When the change was made, I don’t know - sorry)
  Whether the list the OP relies on is in every detail Boettner’s is not clear - there are variations upon it, but IM experience they are shorter than the lists given by Boettner. See “Roman Catholicism” for further details.

Hope that helps.

 

[tGette]

faith, I would be more than willing (and able) to answer those challenges. However, I advise you to do as Believe_85 said, and make a seperate thread for whatever you want to talk about.

But be careful- more than a few eager evangelists like yourself have been banned for being too “agressive”. Take it slowly, and be charitable.

Yeah…I said this…but then I answered the “questions” anyways.

Shame on me!

I will reiterate what has been said:
Separate threads…please!

 

[Tim_Kirchoff]

Yeah…I said this…but then I answered the “questions” anyways.

Shame on me!

I will reiterate what has been said:
Separate threads…please!

I just took a long time composing my post

so… shame on me.

 

[Zenas]

Four years ago I held many of the same misconceptions you have. Then I discovered EWTN radio and started learning some ot the truths of the Catholic Church. I did study and research with an open mind and was forced to conclude I had been totally wrong about many of my ideas concerning Catholicism. I can provide a rejoinder to all you have alleged but time is short and I expect someone else will. However, I recommend that you go to www.catholic.com and read what is on this site with a heart and mind that is seeking the truth. You probably won’t become a Catholic but you will certainly be disabused of the many misconceptions you have demonstrated in your post.

 

[Mannyfit75]

Do I hint a troll here?

(Please Note: This uploaded content is no longer available.)

 

[mark_a]

There are several points, that when pointed out, the Catholic in question (of the faith not the person) the person gets amazingly defensive and refuses to answer or only gives a generic answer. These questions are such things like the worship of Mary. It doesn’t matter how its worded, its worship. The worship of Mary wasn’t even accepted until prayer to Mary was accepted in 600AD. 600 years after the death of Jesus. That has no direct link to the bible. That is a dogma, and a dogma means a belief thought to be fact. But its not. 43 main doctrines were established after 300AD up until 1965. Thats a long time. Why add things to the religion AFTER the completion of the bible. The only phrase that the bible calls Mary is “blessed”. And even in that verse it only says she will be blessed among women. Not men. Also, the 2nd commandment, the original, which is in Hebrew, states not to have an carven images. So bowing and praying to a statue falls into that.

Another topic is the Last Supper. Called the Eucharist in the Catholic Church. The dogma is that the literal flesh and blood of Jesus Christ is in the bread and wine. IF that was to be true, that would be cannibalism. Plain and simply. Added to that, and this is why people should read the bible themselves and not depend on what others tell them, Christ spoke of that AS He broke the bread and poured the wine, thus showing that it was symbolic. He meant for us to remember Him when we did this act. “Do this in remembrance of Me”. He meant that He is the substance that we need for eternal life. Not eat my literal actual physical flesh. The only times that cannibalism is mentioned in the bible was as a punishment through famines.

Next is the assumption that Mary was sinless. Not true at all. Yes she does deserve merit because she did give birth to the physical God, however, she was not sinless. If she was, then why did she say in Luke 1:47 “And my spirit rejoiced in God my Savior”. Why did she need a savior if she had no sin to be saved of? Also, and this goes for the “infallibility” of the pope,
Romans 3:23, “For ALL have fallen short of the Glory of God”.
So we all fall short and we all sin. No one but Jesus was sinless. Also there is no support biblically that anyone is infallible. That seems like a ruse to cover the butts of Catholic leaders. So that if they make a mistake, they are covered. But then again, if he did have that, he wouldn’t make a bad decision, which Popes have.

The last, at least for this post, is the claim that the true church is the Catholic Church and the true bible is the Catholic bible. The first true bible was the Torah, as the Jews were way ahead of the Catholics. Jesus Himself was Jewish. He was not Catholic. Most people know that the original bible, Genesis to Revelation was written in Hebrew, Greek and Aramaic. So the claim that the change in the 10 commandments is because of numbering is wrong.

I wasn’t aware!!!

 

[tGette]

I wasn’t aware!!!

You’re right!
I need to leave the Catholic Church!

Now could anyone point me in the direction of WHICH church to go to!?!

 

[Mannyfit75]

You’re right!
I need to leave the Catholic Church!

Now could anyone point me in the direction of WHICH church to go to!?!

Find the Church that has the keys of the Kingdom. That’s is the only Church which Jesus Church founded.

 

[tGette]

Find the Church that has the keys of the Kingdom. That’s is the only Church which Jesus Church founded.

Can I just try to make my own keys and hope they fit in the lock?
You know…maybe I could pick the lock? Find my own way in!

 

[Rolltide]

Also, and this goes for the “infallibility” of the pope,
Romans 3:23, “For ALL have fallen short of the Glory of God”.
So we all fall short and we all sin. No one but Jesus was sinless. Also there is no support biblically that anyone is infallible. That seems like a ruse to cover the butts of Catholic leaders. So that if they make a mistake, they are covered. But then again, if he did have that, he wouldn’t make a bad decision, which Popes have.

I’ll have to address these questions one by one, but this point is the easiest to address, since you are confusing “infallibility” with “impeccability”. Impeccability means that one is absolutely free from sin. This is absolutely NOT true for the pope! The Catholic Church fully admits that there have been some terribly corrupt popes (such as Alexander VI). Even if that sin involves the running of the church, there are many facets of the church that are perfectly fallible. For example, if the pope appoints a corrupt bishop, or commits a sexual sin, this doesn’t affect doctrine in any way.

Infallibility is a very limited power. It simply means that the Pope, when speaking specifically on matters of faith and morals, and only when he formally declares that he is invoking the power, cannot err, as he is protected by the guidance of the Holy Spirit. The pope, for example, couldn’t suddenly do something like “un-declare” the Trinity. That DOES fall under faith and morals, and in that instance, he is infallible. In fact, infallibility is almost never invoked. The pope has only used the power twice in the last 200 years.

 

[RobHom]

There are several points, that when pointed out, the Catholic in question (of the faith not the person) the person gets amazingly defensive and refuses to answer or only gives a generic answer. These questions are such things like the worship of Mary. It doesn’t matter how its worded, its worship.

Is there a question there? Generally “questions” are ended with a question mark, like this ? In any event, it would appear that all you are doing is expressing your opinion, or parroting the opinion of someone else. Your lack of knowledge on this subject is astounding.

The worship of Mary wasn’t even accepted until prayer to Mary was accepted in 600AD. 600 years after the death of Jesus. That has no direct link to the bible. That is a dogma, and a dogma means a belief thought to be fact. But its not. 43 main doctrines were established after 300AD up until 1965. Thats a long time. Why add things to the religion AFTER the completion of the bible. The only phrase that the bible calls Mary is “blessed”. And even in that verse it only says she will be blessed among women. Not men. Also, the 2nd commandment, the original, which is in Hebrew, states not to have an carven images. So bowing and praying to a statue falls into that.

Is there are question hidden in there somewhere? Again, your lack of knowledge on these subjects is astounding.

Another topic is the Last Supper. Called the Eucharist in the Catholic Church. The dogma is that the literal flesh and blood of Jesus Christ is in the bread and wine. IF that was to be true, that would be cannibalism. Plain and simply. Added to that, and this is why people should read the bible themselves and not depend on what others tell them, Christ spoke of that AS He broke the bread and poured the wine, thus showing that it was symbolic. He meant for us to remember Him when we did this act. “Do this in remembrance of Me”. He meant that He is the substance that we need for eternal life. Not eat my literal actual physical flesh. The only times that cannibalism is mentioned in the bible was as a punishment through famines.

And I suppose there was a question hidden in there as well? Perhaps you could spend some time actually learning about what Catholics believe and not rely on the “erroneous opinions” of anti-Catholics…99.9% of whom are totally wrong in what they believe Catholics believe. Why is that you might wonder? Because they learned the erroneous information from another person who learned erroneous information from another person who learned…yep, you’re right…from another person who was wrong.

Next is the assumption that Mary was sinless. Not true at all. Yes she does deserve merit because she did give birth to the physical God, however, she was not sinless. If she was, then why did she say in Luke 1:47 “And my spirit rejoiced in God my Savior”. Why did she need a savior if she had no sin to be saved of? Also, and this goes for the “infallibility” of the pope,
Romans 3:23, “For ALL have fallen short of the Glory of God”.
So we all fall short and we all sin. No one but Jesus was sinless. Also there is no support biblically that anyone is infallible. That seems like a ruse to cover the butts of Catholic leaders. So that if they make a mistake, they are covered. But then again, if he did have that, he wouldn’t make a bad decision, which Popes have.

It would seem that you apparently don’t really read the Bible, or believe in what is contained therein. You certainly seem to be prone to self interpretation…even though the Bible directly admonishes against that. And yet…your opinion, that being all that it is, is in error. As to Mary, and as to the Pope.

The last, at least for this post, is the claim that the true church is the Catholic Church and the true bible is the Catholic bible. The first true bible was the Torah, as the Jews were way ahead of the Catholics. Jesus Himself was Jewish. He was not Catholic. Most people know that the original bible, Genesis to Revelation was written in Hebrew, Greek and Aramaic. So the claim that the change in the 10 commandments is because of numbering is wrong.

First, the “Torah” was not a bible. It is the First of Three Sections of the TANAKH, which is the Hebrew Bible. And the Torah is the Five Books of Moses. Your “bible” knowledge is extremely lacking and your hypothesis is specious at best.

We are well aware that Christ was Jewish… We are well aware of the languages that the separate books of the completed Bible are or were written in. It was the Catholic Church that compiled the books of the Holy Bible and established the Canon of the Bible.

Change in the numbering of the Commandments Now, that’s a new one…

You really should be careful as to your sources. I also think its a bit arrogant on your part to place your “perceived knowledge” above that of men far more learned in Holy Scriptures… Like the founders of the Reformation… even they agreed on the Sinless Nature of The Virgin Mary. And some of them even agreed on the “real presence”…

Rather than make silly accusations and statements…you would do better to actually learn what Catholics believe and shut out the nonsense that others outside the Church are telling you.

We have no need or reason to be defensive of give generic answers…but then, you have yet to “ask a question”. All you did was post a mini-diatribe on a set of subjects that has been put to rest more times than you have taken a breath.

 

[Gamera]

Jesus Himself was Jewish. He was not Catholic.

He wasn’t Christian at all, so by your reasoning, we shouldn’t be Christian, either. Is that really your argument?

 

[Rolltide]

The last, at least for this post, is the claim that the true church is the Catholic Church and the true bible is the Catholic bible. The first true bible was the Torah, as the Jews were way ahead of the Catholics. Jesus Himself was Jewish. He was not Catholic. Most people know that the original bible, Genesis to Revelation was written in Hebrew, Greek and Aramaic. So the claim that the change in the 10 commandments is because of numbering is wrong.

This post (and let me speak as a professional historian here, which I am) makes absolutely no sense! Let’s dissect it.

1. The first “true Bible” was NOT the Torah. “Bible” is a word that wasn’t used until almost 400 AD and refers specifically to the unified collection of inspired scriptures used by Christians. Before the Bible, you simply had Scripture. Jesus never said, “In the Bible, it is said…” He says, “It is written in Scripture…”
2. You are correct. Jesus was Jewish, and utilized and quoted the Torah, later added by Christians to the Bible as the Old Testament. Christianity is an evolution of Judaism. The Apostles and followers of Jesus were the first Christians, but our heritage before that point was Jewish, ending with Jesus.
3. You are right. The original collection of Scripture into a single unified unit known as the Bible was written in Hebrew, Greek, and Aramaic. However, this posed a great problem for Christians, since most people did not read all three languages. This is why almost from the beginning, it was translated into the vernacular, which in Roman times was Latin. This was done by St. Jerome around 400 AD. Only then did most Christians have access to the Bible in an easily accessible single volume that could be read in a single language. Further, until the late 300s AD, there wasn’t even total agreement as to what books were inspired and were to be included in “the Bible”.
4. Have you looked at the two translations of the 10 commandments side by side? If not, let’s take a look! Note that Lutherans (a Protestant sect) agree with the Latin Catholic numbering system. Also remember that the Ten Commandments are listed at three different places in the Bible (Exodus 20 and Exodous 34 and Deuteronomy 5:6-21) and so your numbering depends on which passage you refer to.

Here is Exodus 20:

2 I am the LORD thy God, which have brought thee out of the land of Egypt, out of the house of bondage.

3 Thou shalt have no other gods before Me.

4 Thou shalt not make unto thee any graven image, or any likeness of any thing that is in heaven above, or that is in the earth beneath, or that is in the water under the earth.

5 Thou shalt not bow down thyself to them, nor serve them: for I the LORD thy God am a jealous God, visiting the iniquity of the fathers upon the children unto the third and fourth generation of them that hate me;

6 And shewing mercy unto thousands of them that love me, and keep my commandments.

7 Thou shalt not take the name of the LORD thy God in vain; for the LORD will not hold him guiltless that taketh his name in vain.

8 Remember the sabbath day, to keep it holy.

9 Six days shalt thou labour, and do all thy work:
10 But the seventh day is the sabbath of the LORD thy God: in it thou shalt not do any work, thou, nor thy son, nor thy daughter, thy manservant, nor thy maidservant, nor thy cattle, nor thy stranger that is within thy gates:
11 For in six days the LORD made heaven and earth, the sea, and all that in them is, and rested the seventh day: wherefore the LORD blessed the sabbath day, and hallowed it.
12 Honour thy father and thy mother: that thy days may be long upon the land which the LORD thy God giveth thee.
13 Thou shalt not kill. 1
14 Thou shalt not commit adultery.
15 Thou shalt not steal.
16 Thou shalt not bear false witness against thy neighbour.
17 Thou shalt not covet thy neighbour’s house, thou shalt not covet thy neighbour’s wife, nor his manservant, nor his maidservant, nor his ox, nor his ***, nor any thing that is thy neighbour’s.

So… given the passage listings, are there, in fact, 16 commandments??? NO! But… different denominations break them down differently.

Here’s how the Jews list them:

1. 2
2. 3,4,5,6
3. 7
4. 8, 9, 10, 11
5. 12
6. 13
7. 14
8. 15
9. 16
10. 17

Here’s how Catholics list them:

1. 3,4,5,6
2. 7
3. 8,9,10,11
4. 12
5. 13
6. 14
7. 15
8. 16
9. 17a (passage is split in half)
10. 17b (passage is split in half)

Here’s how Eastern Catholics, Orthodox, and Protestants list them:

1. 3
2. 4,5,6
3. 7
4. 8,9,10,11
5. 12
6. 13
7. 14
8. 15
9. 16
10. 17

 

[Rolltide]

The following is quoted from fisheaters.com/10commandments.html

When the Commandments are listed, they are often listed in short-hand form, such that, for ex., verses 8, 9, 10 and 11 concerning the Sabbath become simply “Remember the Sabbath and to keep it holy.” Because Latin Catholics group 3, 4, 5 and 6 together as all pertaining to the concept “Thou shalt have no other gods before Me,” we are accused of having “dropped” the commandment against idols. That Eastern Catholics list the Commandments differently never enters the equation for people who think this way; they are simply against those they probably call the “Romish popers” and that’s that (I hope it doesn’t bother them that Jews would accuse them of totally forgetting the First Commandment, or that Latin Catholics could accuse some Protestants of skipping lightly over the commandments against lust. And why don’t the Protestants who have a problem with our numbering system go after the Lutherans for the same thing, anyway?).

**
Bottom line:**

chapter and verse numbering in the Bible came about in the Middle Ages

the Catholic Church (which includes Eastern Catholics, too) has two different numbering systems for the Commandments given, one agreeing with the most common Protestant enumeration;

the Latin Church’s numbering is the most common in the Catholic Church and is the one referred to by Protestants who, ignoring Eastern Catholic Churches, accuse the Catholic Church of having dropped a Commandment;

no Commandment has been dropped, in any case, but the Latin Church’s shorthand for the Commandments looks different than the typical Protestant version because of how the Commandments are grouped;

everyone knows how to find Exodus 20 in the Bible, anyway – even us stoopid Latin Catholics; and

we don’t care how they are grouped together; we only care that they are understood and obeyed – not because we are under the Old Testament Moral and Ceremonial Law with its legalism and non-salvific ritual (we aren’t!), but because we are to obey God as children of the New Covenant, whose moral law includes the Two Great Commandments (to love God and to love our neighbor) which surpass the Decalogue, and whose Sacraments surpass empty ritual, being media of grace.