A Question for Catholics

Originally posted by Nemesio
Lucifershammer:

You cite an interesting passage in St Matthew 16:19. Every English translation I've ever
seen has been dishonest relative to the Greek. The verse reads, in Greek:

Doso soi tas kleidas tes basileias ton ouranon,
I will give to you the keys of the kingdom of the heavens,

kai o ean deses epi tes ges estai [b]dedemenon en tois ...[text shortened]... he careful grammar of the Greek and is totally concordant with the Matthian
reading.

Nemesio[/b]

Nemesio,

Thanks for the Greek transliteration. One learns something new every day! 😀

Nevertheless, one needs to be careful how one uses tense in a situation that involves a being that is essentially out of Time - i.e. God. Does it make sense to say that sins have 'already' been forgiven by God prior to absolution by the priest if God's forgiveness is an event that does not take place in time?

I think the idea of causality is more relevant here. The priest is only able to absolve the sins of the penitent because God absolves the sins of the penitent and is only able to forgive the sins of the penitent because God forgives the sins of the penitent. So, the situation here is not, AFAICS, one where an Infinite God is at the mercy of arbitrary decisions of priests on earth*. Rather, the priest's action is more of a final confirmation to the penitent that his sins have, indeed, been forgiven.

Cheers,

LH

---
* This reminds me of the situation in the film Dogma where a supposed "indulgence" frees any person who walks through the door of some church from all sin (including mortal sin). Naturally, the film gives you a good idea of what the Church does not teach.

Originally posted by lucifershammer
Does it make sense to say that sins have 'already' been forgiven by God prior to absolution by the priest if God's forgiveness is an event that does not take place in time?

This doesn't make sense. Can you cite any other example of things that happen in heaven
that take place out of time in the context of the Gospels? Every other example of heaven-
related activity is definitively in the past, present or future, not pecularly arranged as in these
passages.

I think the idea of causality is more relevant here. The priest is only able to absolve the sins of the penitent because God absolves the sins of the penitent and is only able to forgive the sins of the penitent because God forgives the sins of the penitent.

I would agree that, indeed!, the idea of causality is the issue.

Rather, the priest's action is more of a final confirmation to the penitent that his sins have, indeed, been forgiven.

That's right. The Greek text makes it clear that it is a confirmation but the translations
invariably make a casual link that is not there. The Greek also makes it clear that
the absence of forgiveness on earth does not entail the absence of forgiveness in heaven.
That is, if a person sins such that a priest does not know about it, it does not entail that a
priest is needed to confirm that the sin is or is not forgiven. The text is very clear in that
regard.

That having been said, I am not trying to undermine the value and significance that a good
Confession can have to the faithful, or its Sacramental nature. However, the causal
link between earth and heaven is not supported by the Scriptures and, consequently, its
necessity for entering into heaven is, similarly, Scripturally indefensible.

Nemesio

Originally posted by The Chess Express
[b]what i mean by 'in communion with God' is not experiencing his love but acting out of his love.

How is it possible to not experience God's love but act out of it? How does "acting out of love" as you put it entitle somebody to forgive sins for God? God tells us to love our neighbor as we love ourselves (not as Jesus loves us BTW). Wh ...[text shortened]... otential to find God, doesn’t mean that everybody does. Are there 6 billion saints in the world?[/b]

You have clearly made a mistake. And i too am partially responsible for not noting it immediately. Every one must forgive. True. Do they necassarily absolve? I'm not sure let me think about it. I should think that if you are in communion with God then true (but i haven't retrieved by bible yet so dont attack me on that).

How is it possible to not experience God's love but act out of it?
I never said this (in fact i believe to be acting out of Gods love you usually must be experiencing it). To act out of communion with God must mean you act out of his love. I never said you don't experience it.

And yes Jesus does say love each other as i have loved you (John 13. 34).

I also never said forgive on behalf of God (although i do intuitively suspect this is true but i haven't got my bible with me).

Secondly how does the priest receives Gods authority to absolve sins. I infer that if any one can perform a baptism they can absolve as well. (any one can perform a baptism).

Originally posted by Conrau K
You have clearly made a mistake. And i too am partially responsible for not noting it immediately. Every one must forgive. True. Do they necassarily absolve? I'm not sure let me think about it. I should think that if you are in communion with God then true (but i haven't retrieved by bible yet so dont attack me on that).

How is it possible to not exper ...[text shortened]... that if any one can perform a baptism they can absolve as well. (any one can perform a baptism).

Man, you are really confusing me! Please try not to contradict what you have previously posted and then defend it as if both sides were true.

Every one must forgive. True. Do they necassarily absolve? I'm not sure

What exactly do you mean by absolve? To forgive sins on behalf of God?

To act out of communion with God must mean you act out of his love. I never said you don't experience it.

Then what did you mean by this?

what i mean by 'in communion with God' is not experiencing his love but acting out of his love.

Here’s another point where you contradict yourself.

I also never said forgive on behalf of God

Then what did you mean by this?

You dont need to be a priest to forgive someones sins (or even baptise) in the Catholic church. In the passage given above Jesus is speaking to his disciples. Who are Jesus' disciples:Anyone who loves his neighbour more then Jesus love you.

In the passages that were cited,

(John 20:19-23) “If you forgive anyone his sins, they are forgiven; if you do not forgive them, they are not forgiven.” and also Mt 16:19 and Mt 18:18,

Jesus told his disciples to judge (as in to forgive or not) on behalf of God. What you basically said is that anyone who loves his neighbor more than Jesus loves you (which we agree is impossible) may forgive on behalf of God.

Secondly how does the priest receives Gods authority to absolve sins. I infer that if any one can perform a baptism they can absolve as well. (any one can perform a baptism).

You previously mentioned that one does not even need to be a priest to baptize, and now you are saying that anyone who baptizes may “absolve” sins with God’s authority. Now, "anyone can perform a baptism." This contradicts everything. 😕:'(🙄😞

I'll stick to what I said originally and leave it at that, "I appreciate the gist of what you are saying. I agree that it’s important for people to forgive for there own sake as well as the offenders."

Peace.

Originally posted by sasquatch672
This is a point of order on which I have frequently reflected. The Bible teaches that if you believe in Christ your sins are forgiven. But confession was established as a sacrament. Seems to me that really confession was a job the church created for itself and assigned to itself. Isn't it good enough to talk to God and express sorrow for your sins ...[text shortened]... . priest)? (You might guess from my question what my answer would be.) What are your opinions?

This makes sense to me. It’s our inner relationship with God that God is concerned with. We do a great job of confusing things…eesh. 😞

Originally posted by sasquatch672
Seems to me that really confession was a job the church created for itself and assigned to itself.

I wonder why...

http://www.wsu.edu:8080/~dee/GLOSSARY/INDULGE.HTM

"In the late thirteenth century, the church came up with the idea of indulgences. In the spiritual life of sinners, indulgences function exactly the same way money functions in their economic life. Here's the logic: since the expiation of sin involves temporal punishment and this temporal punishment involves the doing of good works, why not substitute someone else's good works for the good works you're required to do? Why not pay someone else to do the good works demanded of you as temporal punishment?

Church officials argued that clergy were doing more good works then they needed to; they had, you might say, more than good works in their spiritual accounts than they had sins to pay for. Why not sell them? So selling the good works of the church was precisely what the church did. With the approval of the pope, individual bishops could sell indulgences which more or less paid off any temporal punishment or good works that the individual believer had accumulated in the previous year. It substituted the good works of the Catholic clergy for the good works required of the individual believer. Proof of this substitution was in the indulgence itself, which was a piece of paper, like a piece of money or a check, that certified that the good works of the clergy had paid off the "good works debt" of the individual believer."

Originally posted by sasquatch672
A fine example of the absurdity of some of the Catholic church's decisions. We've gotten way off the beaten path. Christ wanted us to pray one way. The liturgy was originally very simple - a rememberance of the Last Supper and teachings of Christ's works and words. It's still a simple and beautiful mass, except that I've found, by and large, th ...[text shortened]... , who wanted to continue the same malfeasance - selling indulgences, etc. - that made them rich.

Luther, however, neither eliminated the requirement of confession, nor the authority of the priest to declare the forgiveness of sins. What he did do was to replace the requirement of private confession of specific sins with that of corporate confession (in the liturgy) of sinning. Private confession was not done away with as an option, for those who wish to avail themselves of it.

From the “Brief Order for Confession and Forgiveness” in the Lutheran Book of Worship: “As a called and ordained minister of the Church of Christ, and by his authority, I therefore declare to you the entire forgiveness of all your sins….” [Note: Lutheran clergy no longer use the title “priest,” but ordination is into the priestly order.]

BTW, if no one has yet declared to you a hearty welcome to the Spirituality Forum, I hereby do so, on no authority at all. 🙂

Originally posted by sasquatch672
Thank you vites, I appreciate your kind words and you tutelage. I don't expect to hear a whole lot of positive things from people in here, but it's always nice when I do.

I just grew up Lutheran, that’s all; although I’m no longer in the Christian fold, so I am intruding myself into the intra-Christian debates less and less. Based on reading a lot of your posts on the Debates Forum, I know I’ll learn from you here.

Originally posted by Conrau K
You dont need to be a priest to forgive someones sins (or even baptise) in the Catholic church. In the passage given above Jesus is speaking to his disciples. Who are Jesus' disciples:
Anyone who loves his neighbour more then Jesus love you.
Anyone who picks up his cross and follows Jesus.
Hence, any one who is good (or 'in comunion with God'😉 qualifies to forgive. And any who is good should forgive anyway.

...He also breathed on them. "Ordaining" them with the gift of the Holy Spirit -- this is why priests are ordained today.

Originally posted by Morren
...He also breathed on them. "Ordaining" them with the gift of the Holy Spirit -- this is why priests are ordained today.

Where do you get this? Is this in the Bible?

Originally posted by The Chess Express
Man, you are really confusing me! Please try not to contradict what you have previously posted and then defend it as if both sides were true.

[b]Every one must forgive. True. Do they necassarily absolve? I'm not sure

What exactly do you mean by absolve? To forgive sins on behalf of God?

To act out of communion with God must mean y ...[text shortened]... at it’s important for people to forgive for there own sake as well as the offenders."

Peace.

Stop putting words in my mouth. If you read both replied you will find no contradictions. I never said forgive on behalf of God.

Absolve: Take away their sins on authority of God
Forgive: Ignore the sins they have done to you.

Communion with God: Acting out of his. Although you dont necassarily experience it. I have had soem depressed frfiends. They dont feel any love. But their the nicest poeple I know.

When I said forgive I meant on your behalf not on Gods.

P.S thanking you for finding the bible references that i was looking for. Now I can say anyone can forgive on behalf of God. I also corected myself and said, love each other as Jesus loved you.

Now look who's contradicted themselves. You first said only saints can forgive now you've provided evidence to say anyone can.

Originally posted by Conrau K
Stop putting words in my mouth. If you read both replied you will find no contradictions. I never said forgive on behalf of God.

Absolve: Take away their sins on authority of God
Forgive: Ignore the sins they have done to you.

Communion with God: Acting out of his. Although you dont necassarily experience it. I have had soem depressed frfiends. They ...[text shortened]... mselves. You first said only saints can forgive now you've provided evidence to say anyone can.

Stop putting words in my mouth. If you read both replied you will find no contradictions. I never said forgive on behalf of God.

This is what you wrote.

Secondly how does the priest receives Gods authority to absolve sins. I infer that if any one can perform a baptism they can absolve as well. (any one can perform a baptism).

Short memory? According to your own definition to “absolve” means to take away sin on God’s authority. This is the same as forgiving sin on behalf of God.

Now look who's contradicted themselves. You first said only saints can forgive now you've provided evidence to say anyone can.

What you don’t seem to understand is that in order to love somebody as Jesus loves you it is necessary to be a saint, but since we don't seem to be communicating I won’t try to explain it.

Now I can say anyone can forgive on behalf of God.

Perhaps this explains all the scandals involving priests. Maybe this is why people are confessing to child molesters.