Confession

[mroger]

[url="http://http://matt1618.freeyellow.com/confess.html"]Why Confession is Biblical[/url]
[url="http://matt1618.freeyellow.com/confess.html"]http://matt1618.freeyellow.com/confess.html[/url]

(Read this page)

I hafve argued for some time to my fellow seminarians, who could not dispute, and relied on the faith of the Church that confession to a priest is justified, however, my confession to God alone should be sufficient. However, this Biblical argument for the sacrament of reconciliation has [b]wowed [/b] me.

Effectively, I must concede that there is no other recourse than to receive the sacrament of reconciliation through the ministry of the Priesthood.

I am curious though, what argument could a Protestant provide against the wisdom of the Bible. In my opinion, the Biblical argument for reconciliation to a priest defeats itself, as it defeated me. There is no sufficient text to contradict what this argument provides, if that be the case - THEN THE BIBLE CONTRADICTS ITSELF, causing errancy in the Bible - which cannot be the case because the Bible does not contradict itself.

So...I would not dare you to contradict what Jesus, and Paul and James have clearly taught or what the Bible has plainly written, but I would like to know your thoughts.

Edited January 22, 2007 by geistesswiesenschaften

[mroger]

Consequently, I wonder - What, if any, doctrines of the Church, or Traditions are there which actually do not find their home in the Scripture? It would seem senseless to go around making things up, and so I have no provision for it.

I have disputed, and harshly, the Immaculate Conception of Mary, and have found that what seemed at first to be just a tradition of the church has great support in Luke, "Full of Grace". Philosophically, it does for Mary what no other argument can do to dissuade my acceptance of this teaching.

Papacy, too, is clearly defined in the Bible.

Tradition, with the capital "T", it seems, actually gains it authority FROM the Word of God, and too, from the works of the Apostles. Such that, Protestants cannot adequately argue against that Authority.

I am becoming decidely more convinced that the Catholic Church is a better "bible" church than even those who claim to be just a "bible" church. This is not a position that most Catholics nor protestants have accepted, but one which I feel we should take ownership of.

I had decided long ago that if the Catholic Church had an advertising slogan, it would read - "Catholics - First in Christ!"

I am becoming more aware of the need to open the floodgates and show the world exactly what the Catholic Church IS, where it came from, and why, for me at least, to be un-Catholic, would be - UNFULFILLING. I'd sure like to start with Evangelizing current/practising Catholics, moving onward toward lapsed Catholics, moving on to Anglican/Episcopalian dialogue, then reaching the Catholics who have washed themselves of all things Catholic (these being the most difficult to overcome).

I feel we need to teach History in our CCD classes as much as Bible, because it seems equally as important. I want our members to have a logical, philosophical, theological, and biblical foundation in their Catechism and early education. I want that even teenagers could evangelize if they had the opportunity.

I see that there is a lot of wisdom and resourcefulness in Phatmass forum posters. I would encourage you all take your message to the Parish, as I am sure that many of you already do.

But, I find it highly disappointing that I am learning things which seem so basic, and yet, I never learned in CCC, or Confirmation, or even in church homilies. My parents often had priests or seminarians visit our home for dinner or conversation, and somehow, I missed all of this. My parents even taught CCD!! Together, we are actually learning things we did not know before.

For example, Immaculate Mary, both my parents and I had always believed the Immaculate Conception regarded Jesus' birth. It never occured to us that Mary, too, was Immaculate.

I'd really like to change what we are taeching, and how often, too!

[CatholicCid]

[quote name='geistesswiesenschaften' post='1172892' date='Jan 21 2007, 11:49 PM']
But, I find it highly disappointing that I am learning things which seem so basic, and yet, I never learned in CCC, or Confirmation, or even in church homilies. My parents often had priests or seminarians visit our home for dinner or conversation, and somehow, I missed all of this. My parents even taught CCD!! Together, we are actually learning things we did not know before.

For example, Immaculate Mary, both my parents and I had always believed the Immaculate Conception regarded Jesus' birth. It never occured to us that Mary, too, was Immaculate.

I'd really like to change what we are taeching, and how often, too!
[/quote]

That's kind of odd since it is in the CCC pretty clearly...
[quote]Through the centuries the Church has become ever more aware that Mary, "full of grace" (Luke 1:28) through God, was redeemed from the moment of her conception. That is what the dogma of the Immaculate Conception confesses, as Pope Pius IX proclaimed in 1854: "The most Blessed Virgin Mary was, from the first moment of her conception, by a singular grace and privilege of almighty God and by virtue of the merits of Jesus Christ, Savior of the human race, preserved immune from all stain of original sin." [CCC 491][/quote]

[VeniteAdoremus]

I've quoted that piece of Scripture to Protestant friends, and the most common answer is that indeed, the power to forgive sins was given to the Apostles, but it also died with them. They don't believe in the Apostolic Succession and they don't believe in "priests" as being a special group of people.

[SRMiller]

[quote name='geistesswiesenschaften' post='1172892' date='Jan 22 2007, 04:49 AM']
Consequently, I wonder - What, if any, doctrines of the Church, or Traditions are there which actually do not find their home in the Scripture? It would seem senseless to go around making things up, and so I have no provision for it.

I have disputed, and harshly, the Immaculate Conception of Mary, and have found that what seemed at first to be just a tradition of the church has great support in Luke, "Full of Grace". Philosophically, it does for Mary what no other argument can do to dissuade my acceptance of this teaching.

Papacy, too, is clearly defined in the Bible.

Tradition, with the capital "T", it seems, actually gains it authority FROM the Word of God, and too, from the works of the Apostles. Such that, Protestants cannot adequately argue against that Authority.

I am becoming decidely more convinced that the Catholic Church is a better "bible" church than even those who claim to be just a "bible" church. This is not a position that most Catholics nor protestants have accepted, but one which I feel we should take ownership of.

I had decided long ago that if the Catholic Church had an advertising slogan, it would read - "Catholics - First in Christ!"

I am becoming more aware of the need to open the floodgates and show the world exactly what the Catholic Church IS, where it came from, and why, for me at least, to be un-Catholic, would be - UNFULFILLING. I'd sure like to start with Evangelizing current/practising Catholics, moving onward toward lapsed Catholics, moving on to Anglican/Episcopalian dialogue, then reaching the Catholics who have washed themselves of all things Catholic (these being the most difficult to overcome).

I feel we need to teach History in our CCD classes as much as Bible, because it seems equally as important. I want our members to have a logical, philosophical, theological, and biblical foundation in their Catechism and early education. I want that even teenagers could evangelize if they had the opportunity.

I see that there is a lot of wisdom and resourcefulness in Phatmass forum posters. I would encourage you all take your message to the Parish, as I am sure that many of you already do.

But, I find it highly disappointing that I am learning things which seem so basic, and yet, I never learned in CCC, or Confirmation, or even in church homilies. My parents often had priests or seminarians visit our home for dinner or conversation, and somehow, I missed all of this. My parents even taught CCD!! Together, we are actually learning things we did not know before.

For example, Immaculate Mary, both my parents and I had always believed the Immaculate Conception regarded Jesus' birth. It never occured to us that Mary, too, was Immaculate.

I'd really like to change what we are taeching, and how often, too!
[/quote]

Have you heard of the Landings programme? It's a programme designed for both Catholics still in the Church who want to learn more, and lapsed Catholics coming back. I'm actually trying to bring it to Liverpool at the moment, God willing. I think it's an American programme, but I loved it when I was in Florida, and it answered a few of my questions. The format is kinda flexible, so you can add as much history and other things, as well as using the CCC and Scripture.

[mroger]

[quote name='VeniteAdoremus' post='1172999' date='Jan 22 2007, 03:01 AM']
I've quoted that piece of Scripture to Protestant friends, and the most common answer is that indeed, the power to forgive sins was given to the Apostles, but it also died with them. They don't believe in the Apostolic Succession and they don't believe in "priests" as being a special group of people.
[/quote]

There is a reasonable philosophical argument that you could try. I haven't before, but I am working on it...

The argument is this: Jesus gave the "gift" of the Holy Spirit to the Apostles, yes? Jesus was not an Indian giver was he? [nevermind that I'm a quarter Caddo Indian, hehe!] Well, then, if a person receives a gift, is he not free to do with it whatever he chooses. The Apostle's handed their gifts, aka authority, to other Bishops, or as the Bible churches call them, "Elders". That much is clear.

There is also of course, what I believe, that Jesus did not intend for any ministry to end with the Apostles. He expected the Apostles to carry out his mission and that means the passing on of this ministry. His entire post-resurrection story on earth would not make much sense otherwise.

[Lil Red]

[quote name='SRMiller' post='1173011' date='Jan 22 2007, 01:36 AM']
Have you heard of the Landings programme? It's a programme designed for both Catholics still in the Church who want to learn more, and lapsed Catholics coming back. I'm actually trying to bring it to Liverpool at the moment, God willing. I think it's an American programme, but I loved it when I was in Florida, and it answered a few of my questions. The format is kinda flexible, so you can add as much history and other things, as well as using the CCC and Scripture.
[/quote]
do you have a link?

[VeniteAdoremus]

[quote name='geistesswiesenschaften' post='1173196' date='Jan 22 2007, 09:16 PM']
There is a reasonable philosophical argument that you could try. I haven't before, but I am working on it...

The argument is this: Jesus gave the "gift" of the Holy Spirit to the Apostles, yes? Jesus was not an Indian giver was he? [nevermind that I'm a quarter Caddo Indian, hehe!] Well, then, if a person receives a gift, is he not free to do with it whatever he chooses. The Apostle's handed their gifts, aka authority, to other Bishops, or as the Bible churches call them, "Elders". That much is clear.

There is also of course, what I believe, that Jesus did not intend for any ministry to end with the Apostles. He expected the Apostles to carry out his mission and that means the passing on of this ministry. His entire post-resurrection story on earth would not make much sense otherwise.
[/quote]


Oh... that's pretty wicked. I'm definitely going to try that. Thanks a bunch!