Zone1 Early Christians believed that the bread and wine used in the Eucharist were transformed into the body and blood of Christ

[Meriweather]

it is not my own voice I hear, but His.

Out loud? It is your ears that hear? Or, is it your heart...which we are warned is deceitful...

 

[Paradoxical#1]

I don't want you to be a part of my faith.

I do "make sacrifices". Lots of them. But you don't have a clue as to what that term means. Your way of thinking is all mixed up.

 

[hadit]

Out loud? It is your ears that hear? Or, is it your heart...which we are warned is deceitful...

And what do you hear but a man's voice, that we also know is deceitful? That's why we have to go back to the Word, which is not. When Jesus says, "Your sins are forgiven", they're forgiven. I don't need another person to tell me that.

 

[Mashmont]

Wow, what is your secret to living for hundreds of years? I mean, you must have if you know them all personally like that.

I can read biographies. They are readily available.
Show me a Protestant founder who remained celibate.

 

[hadit]

I can read biographies. They are readily available.
Show me a Protestant founder who remained celibate.

Why would they when Scripture doesn't require it? You're completely ignoring what they went through that brought them to the place they had to leave the Catholic Church.

 

[Meriweather]

I do have to ask, however, when you think sin is actually forgiven. Is it when the penitent is made aware of it and repents or only after the priest proclaims it?

How about when he is able to confess it and also receive forgiveness from the community? Example: Someone commits murder, is sorry, and will never commit another murder. When do you say he is forgiven? Is it when he recalls Jesus said, "Repentance (change your mind/change your actions) for the forgiveness of sins" and knows he has changed his mind about committing murder?

Think: Did Jesus teach us to keep sins hidden and to oneself?

One needs to confess serious sins, one needs to hear (out loud) those sins are forgiven. That's for one's own good health, so the sin doesn't simmer inwardly, having been buried. When sins are forgiven, there is no need to keep them hidden. Recall the woman at the well. What she tried to keep hidden, Jesus brought out into the open. Confession is for our health and the health of the community, not for our embarrassment.

 

[Mashmont]

Why would they when Scripture doesn't require it? You're completely ignoring what they went through that brought them to the place they had to leave the Catholic Church.

I already presented the bottom line. They wanted sex, and they wanted divorce.

 

[Meriweather]

No, that is not the case. We are commanded to confess our sins to each other.

But Catholics shouldn't? When a Catholic confesses his/her sins to a priest, that Catholic is doing it all wrong? How do you figure?

 

[hadit]

How about when he is able to confess it and also receive forgiveness from the community? Example: Someone commits murder, is sorry, and will never commit another murder. When do you say he is forgiven? Is it when he recalls Jesus said, "Repentance (change your mind/change your actions) for the forgiveness of sins" and knows he has changed his mind about committing murder?

You do understand the difference between sinning against God and sinning against others, right? Remember David?

Psalm 51:

1. Have mercy on me, O God,
according to your unfailing love;
according to your great compassion
blot out my transgressions.
2: Wash away all my iniquity
and cleanse me from my sin.
3: For I know my transgressions,
and my sin is always before me.
4: Against you, you only, have I sinned
and done what is evil in your sight;
so you are right in your verdict
and justified when you judge.

This was after he committed murder,

Think: Did Jesus teach us to keep sins hidden and to oneself?

What do you think happens inside the confessional? The sin stays right there, and the penitent can walk away knowing no one is going to know.

One needs to confess serious sins, one needs to hear (out loud) those sins are forgiven. That's for one's own good health, so the sin doesn't simmer inwardly, having been buried. When sins are forgiven, there is no need to keep them hidden. Recall the woman at the well. What she tried to keep hidden, Jesus brought out into the open. Confession is for our health and the health of the community, not for our embarrassment.

I don't dispute that at all, but what benefit does the community gain if only one person ever hears the confession of sin?

 

[Meriweather]

I understand all of that and have made my objection clearly known. I have seen on this board a Catholic telling me he/she is not a priest because they are thinking of the Catholic priesthood, not God's. It is a problem to me when Christians deny or will not take a title that God has given them. It's like a slap in the face to God.

Stop. When someone says to you, "I'm blue" do you imagine their skin is blue? Or, do so autmoatically know that many words have more than one meaning or definition. All you had to say was, "No, I'm speaking of the Royal Priesthood, not a ministerial priest." Shame on you! Did you lead the person with whom you were communicating into a trap to prove your own point? What conceit if that is what you did!

 

[Meriweather]

He made them a ROYAL priesthood, which is greatly elevated from the Mosaic priesthood. Those could not be both kings and priests.

I am speaking of the KINGDOM OF PRIESTS, not the Mosaic priesthood. From Exodus on, these both existed. Keep in mind the Aramaic definition/etymology for the English translation "royal". In Aramaic it signifies the realm of a kingdom--and Jesus spoke constantly of the kingdom of God.

Here's the problem. Apostolic teaching/tradition which was maintained in the Catholic Church used ancient languages, not modern English. You are using modern English to make your points and that is why so many of them fail among those who go back and study Greek, Latin, Hebrew, Aramaic. Coming up with one's own interpretation of the author's/Bible's original intent loses so much in the English translation.

 

[hadit]

But Catholics shouldn't? When a Catholic confesses his/her sins to a priest, that Catholic is doing it all wrong? How do you figure?

In confession, does the priest confess to sin making it a mutual thing? No. It is not the same thing to go into an anonymous setting where the person you're confessing to is not even supposed to know who you are as to be in a small group of trusted brothers who confess their sin to each other.

 

[Meriweather]

And what do you hear but a man's voice, that we also know is deceitful? That's why we have to go back to the Word, which is not. When Jesus says, "Your sins are forgiven", they're forgiven. I don't need another person to tell me that.

Ah, you don't want to be told....

 

[Meriweather]

What do you think happens inside the confessional? The sin stays right there, and the penitent can walk away knowing no one is going to know.

I don't dispute that at all, but what benefit does the community gain if only one person ever hears the confession of sin?

Not all sins stay inside the confessional--not when restitution is required, not when forgiveness depends on reporting oneself to the authorities for certain crimes. What stays inside the confessional is what the priest hears.

 

[hadit]

Not all sins stay inside the confessional--not when restitution is required, not when forgiveness depends on reporting oneself to the authorities for certain crimes. What stays inside the confessional is what the priest hears.

Which is not the same thing as "confess your sins one to another". The priest never confesses his sin to the penitent, for just one example.

 

[Meriweather]

In confession, does the priest confess to sin making it a mutual thing? No. It is not the same thing to go into an anonymous setting where the person you're confessing to is not even supposed to know who you are as to be in a small group of trusted brothers who confess their sin to each other.

So...It is your opinion one way is right and the other way is wrong? One way should be condemned while the other one praised?

 

[hadit]

Ah, you don't want to be told....

Now you're just making things up that sound good to you. You don't know my mind, and you should not accuse me of thinking things I do not. I endeavor to not do that to you, allowing you to say what you believe instead of saying I already know, why are you unable to do that for me?

 

[Meriweather]

Which is not the same thing as "confess your sins one to another". The priest never confesses his sin to the penitent, for just one example.

Think about it. You go into confession with what is in your heart, and the other person says, "Yes, but let's talk about me."

 

[Meriweather]

Now you're just making things up that sound good to you. You don't know my mind, and you should not accuse me of thinking things I do not. I endeavor to not do that to you, allowing you to say what you believe instead of saying I already know, why are you unable to do that for me?

No, I'm not making things up, I am making a point. And you almost got it. Now say to yourself, "I don't know the Catholic mind and I should not accuse them of what I think they are doing wrong."

 

[hadit]

Think about it. You go into confession with what is in your heart, and the other person says, "Yes, but let's talk about me."

You have it all set up so it can only be a one-way conversation. The priest is already set up as superior with authority over the penitent. I can tell already that a Catholic would have no idea what to do if the priest confessed sin from the pulpit or personally. A Protestant would know immediately what to do if his/her pastor came to them and confessed sin. Does not the priest have responsibility to the congregation, or is he "higher up"? Remember that Jesus said the greatest in His kingdom are those who put themselves last.