Can we try this again?

[jmcrae]

Yeah…the church teaches that venial sins are absolved in the Eucharist, but you can’t even receive if you are in mortal sin.

From all I have read. General Absolution is supposed to be a rare occurrence for special circumstances.

And has absolutely nothing to do with the RCIA. The ceremony provided in the Rite is an optional prelude to individual Confessions for those who have already been baptized. Please note that it is the ceremony that is optional - NOT the individual Confessions, for those who were already baptized before.

 

[rinnie]

Still, the sacrament of Reconciliation is not required. Encouraged, yes. But not required.

This is what you said. When you were told that a person previously Baptised, and if that Baptism is recognized by the Church they must go to Confession before commumion and Confirmation.

You answer was required NO encouraged Yes. That is not the teaching of the RCC.

Go back and read it digger what you said!!

 

[rinnie]

I am picking a side. My side says it’s not required.

Saying “it’s not required” is completely different (despite what you posted) as to whether such should be provided. See my post #262.

And we are telling you the Church said it is. Read post 61 it was explained to you. You just deny it.

 

[rinnie]

And has absolutely nothing to do with the RCIA. The ceremony provided in the Rite is an optional prelude to individual Confessions for those who have already been baptized. Please note that it is the ceremony that is optional - NOT the individual Confessions, for those who were already baptized before.

Just as you explained it quite clear and correct to digger back on page 5.

 

[Church_Militant]

And has absolutely nothing to do with the RCIA. The ceremony provided in the Rite is an optional prelude to individual Confessions for those who have already been baptized. Please note that it is the ceremony that is optional - NOT the individual Confessions, for those who were already baptized before.

Point taken.

 

[diggerdomer]

Yeah…the church teaches that venial sins are absolved in the Eucharist, but you can’t even receive if you are in mortal sin.

From all I have read. General Absolution is supposed to be a rare occurrence for special circumstances.

Yes. Exactly.

 

[diggerdomer]

Okay then digger what is this?

Almighty and everlasting God who forgave the People o Nineveh who REPENTED;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;Grant that WE TRULY REPENTING for SINS may OBTAIN the PERFECT PARDON and RELEASE for our SINS through of Lord Jesus Christ Amen.

Now if the perfect pardon and release from ous sins is not a gemeral Absolution could you explain to me what is?

I don’t know what this is.

Is this something of our own composition? Or a prayer from someone else? Or something in a liturgy? Please, clarify what it is you’re asking me to assess. Thanks.

 

[diggerdomer]

Well digger you can DUH all you want, but USUALLY because ADULTS are the ones becomming part of the RCC they are usually Baptised already in another faith.

I disagree. I think the vast majority of people being initiated into the Catholic Church are infants.

Do you have experience, or other evidence, to suggest otherwise?

Compare how many infants are baptized at your parish in a year to adults who are initiated, for instance. Which number is larger? Just curious.

We have told you numerous of times that if you are an adult and you have had a previous Christian Baptsim it is requried.

Yes, you and others have told me, but you have provided nothing than your opinion. I have provided you the Rite of the Catholic Church. Which should I adhere to?

You keep saying where, we have showed you. It is done before Easter Sunday and before the person receives their first communion.

No, you have not showed me where such is required according to Catholic teaching. You’ve said where it is done, but not that it needs to be done. I never argued nor objected to the fact that it is done, simply saying it’s not required by the Catholic Church. Again, if you have any contradictory teaching from the Church I would love to learn.

Only and Only if there was no previous Baptism it is not required. But it is still REQUIRED about a month or so after being taken into the CC.

Oh.l…so now it’s required AFTER being taken into the CC? What happened to the requirement that you and others have showed me about it happening beforehand???

And, again, I almost hate to ask this as I doubt I will get a factual answer…but…where does the Catholic Church REQUIRE about a month or so after being taken into the CC?

That is why we ALSO told you Numerous times that each individual is different according to their needs.

Of course each individual is different according to his or her needs. That’s my point. I never said nor suggested otherwise.

 

[diggerdomer]

T
If one has a valid Baptism confession is necessary,.

Again (again, again, again)…where does the Catholic Church require this? Please…cite me some Church teaching! I’m tired of asking this.

 

[diggerdomer]

So, it’s required that it should be provided, but, it doesn’t really matter one way or another whether it’s provided or not, because really, it’s not required.

:whacky:

You might think it doesn’t matter, but I disagree. I think the Catholic Church attaches a high significance to the sacrament of Reconciliation. I think it matters. If you don’t, I’d suggest prayer and reflection.

 

[diggerdomer]

That is not the teaching of the RCC.

Show us the teaching you refer to. Let’s clear this up once and for all. Looking forward to your reference.

 

[jmcrae]

You might think it doesn’t matter, but I disagree. I think the Catholic Church attaches a high significance to the sacrament of Reconciliation. I think it matters. If you don’t, I’d suggest prayer and reflection.

Then quit saying that it isn’t required to be provided for the previously-baptized Candidates.

 

[rinnie]

I disagree. I think the vast majority of people being initiated into the Catholic Church are infants.

Do you have experience, or other evidence, to suggest otherwise?

Compare how many infants are baptized at your parish in a year to adults who are initiated, for instance. Which number is larger? Just curious.

Yes, you and others have told me, but you have provided nothing than your opinion. I have provided you the Rite of the Catholic Church. Which should I adhere to?

No, you have not showed me where such is required according to Catholic teaching. You’ve said where it is done, but not that it needs to be done. I never argued nor objected to the fact that it is done, simply saying it’s not required by the Catholic Church. Again, if you have any contradictory teaching from the Church I would love to learn.

Oh.l…so now it’s required AFTER being taken into the CC? What happened to the requirement that you and others have showed me about it happening beforehand???

And, again, I almost hate to ask this as I doubt I will get a factual answer…but…where does the Catholic Church REQUIRE about a month or so after being taken into the CC?

Of course each individual is different according to his or her needs. That’s my point. I never said nor suggested otherwise.

Digger what are you talking about. Let me make this as simple as I possibly can,

1. If a Child is Baptised in the CC it does require CONFESSION before First Holy Communion.
2. If an ADULT is confirmed into the CC and has a VALID BAPTISM Just like the Child that was baptised it must go to CONFESSION.
3. IF an ADULT does not have a valid BAPTISM, CONFESSION IS NOT NEED BECAUSE BAPTISM IS what washes away ALL SIN.

Can you understand what I am saying if a person is Baptised from any other faith and it is a CHRISTIAN BAPTISM they are not RE-BAPTISED it is not possible. Can you not see what we are telling you??

 

[rinnie]

Show us the teaching you refer to. Let’s clear this up once and for all. Looking forward to your reference.

For the Love of Pete Digger, its scripture. 1 Cor 11:27 Therefore anyone who eats the brad or drinks the cup of the Lord unworthily is aswerable for the Body and the Blood of the Lord.

Digger please read CCC 1422-1497 everyday until you figure it out. That is the only way I can see that you will SEE IT!

 

[rinnie]

Yes, they can do this, but this is not the same as celebrating the sacrament. Read the Catechism, the Rites of the Church, Canon Law (this may be especially helpful to you, see canons 959-997 vatican.va/archive/ENG1104/__P3E.HTM, etc. Simply put…Catholic celebration of the sacrament of Reconciliation requires a priest (i.e. Bishop or Priest).

The GIRM (General Instruction of the Roman Missal) which regulates the celebration of the Mass, specifically notes this:

usccb.org/liturgy/current/chapter2.shtml#sect3a

Yes it is, for venial sin we ask God to forgive us for our sins before we enter communion, even if we do not go to commumion.

We ask for forgiveness every sunday, for what we have done and what we have failed to you, and I ask you Blessed Virgin and all the angels and Saints and you my brothers and sisters to pray for me…

No, the sacrament of Reconciliation is not celebrated by all Catholics every Sunday. Yes, the Act of Penitence (aka Penitential Rite) is part of every Mass, but it is not the same as the Sacrament of Reconciliation.

 

[jmcrae]

You might think it doesn’t matter, but I disagree. I think the Catholic Church attaches a high significance to the sacrament of Reconciliation. I think it matters. If you don’t, I’d suggest prayer and reflection.

Digger, you are the one who is suggesting that Candidates need not bother to go to Confession before their Confirmation and First Holy Communion.

I am not the one who is devaluing the Sacrament of Reconciliation, here.

 

[CMatt25]

CCC 846 “Hence they could not be saved who, knowing that the Catholic Church was founded as necessary by God through Christ, would refuse either to enter it or to remain in it.”

Webster’s defines “could” as 1) pt. of can 2) an auxiliary equivalent to can, expressing especially a shade of doubt (e.g., it could be so)

So have you arrived at a unanimous concensus yet as to whether the Church is going against the teachings of Christ in Matt 7:1 and judging they “can not” be saved? Or is She merely saying they “might not”?

 

[Julia1996]

CCC 846 “Hence they could not be saved who, knowing that the Catholic Church was founded as necessary by God through Christ, would refuse either to enter it or to remain in it.”

Webster’s defines “could” as 1) pt. of can 2) an auxiliary equivalent to can, expressing especially a shade of doubt (e.g., it could be so)

So have you arrived at a unanimous concensus yet as to whether the Church is going against the teachings of Christ in Matt 7:1 and judging they “can not” be saved? Or is She merely saying they “might not”?

The statement has 2 interpretations:

1. There is no possibility of them being saved as there is no “can”.
   As in:
   CCC 846 “Hence they could not be saved who, knowing that the Catholic Church was founded as necessary by God through Christ, would refuse either to enter it or to remain in it.”
2. There is a possibility as there is a “can”.
   CCC 846 “Hence they could not be saved who, knowing that the Catholic Church was founded as necessary by God through Christ, would refuse either to enter it or to remain in it.”

Depending on how you group the words, you get different meanings. And from your different meanings, you get an argument.

And I don’t think my post is all that related to the topic, but I just wanted to show how hard it is going to be to get a complete agreement.

 

[jmcrae]

CCC 846 “Hence they could not be saved who, knowing that the Catholic Church was founded as necessary by God through Christ, would refuse either to enter it or to remain in it.”

Webster’s defines “could” as 1) pt. of can 2) an auxiliary equivalent to can, expressing especially a shade of doubt (e.g., it could be so)

So have you arrived at a unanimous concensus yet as to whether the Church is going against the teachings of Christ in Matt 7:1 and judging they “can not” be saved? Or is She merely saying they “might not”?

Don’t take the risk that God doesn’t rely on Webster’s Dictionary - remain in the Church, and then you don’t have to worry about it.

 

[CMatt25]

The statement has 2 interpretations:

1. There is no possibility of them being saved as there is no “can”.
   As in:
   CCC 846 “Hence they could not be saved who, knowing that the Catholic Church was founded as necessary by God through Christ, would refuse either to enter it or to remain in it.”
2. There is a possibility as there is a “can”.
   CCC 846 “Hence they could not be saved who, knowing that the Catholic Church was founded as necessary by God through Christ, would refuse either to enter it or to remain in it.”

Depending on how you group the words, you get different meanings. And from your different meanings, you get an argument.

And I don’t think my post is all that related to the topic, but I just wanted to show how hard it is going to be to get a complete agreement.

Julia, yes I know. I have spent a good deal of time trying to get to the bottom of what the Church means with these words in CCC. 20 pgs ago I began this thread with basically the same question again.

And your post is related. It just frustrates me to no end that on an Apologetics board there is not either a yes, one in such a case can not be saved. Or no, it is merely one might not be. The meaning has to be one or the other. I’m beginning to wonder if “could not” does mean “can not” be saved and folks just don’t want to come out and say it for the obvious reasons.

Oh well. Nevertheless God bless you on your journey in faith and peace be with you always.