Confess My Sins to WHO?

  • Thread starter Thread starter JCFAB
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
J

JCFAB

Guest
So, I was on my local Anti-Catholic Fundamentalist radio talk show in Denver, Colorado the other day. The previous caller raised the objection that it is “biblically” incorrect for Catholics to go to Confession to a priest. “Only God can forgive sins and I don’t need to go to some man to ask for God’s forgiveness!” the called resounded.

Well, after having read and severly marked up Karl’s “Catholicism & Fundamentalism”, my monthly addiction to THIS ROCK, and my budget breaking devotion to buying every book from Ignatius Press, I was up next on the show and feeling GOOD!

“Read John 20:19-23” I said. I continued, “Jesus breathed the Holy Spirit into the Apostles and sent them on the same mission the Father sent HIM on; to bring forgiveness of sins to the world! Jesus gave them the authority to forgive or retain sins. I don’t imagine Jesus just wanted these 11 Apostles to pass away with this God-given authority and not pass it on to their successors!” As I finished my explanation, I stopped to catch my breath and listened for the radio host’s response. He quickly went to a break.

He returned by saying, “Mary Magdaline was also in the room with the disciples in John 20:19-23. If what Catholics believe is true, then women should also be able to forgive sins, right?” I was dumbfounded… I didn’t have a response. The Radio host thanked me for calling in and then hung up the phone. I dropped my head in confusion and filled with a sense of defeat. I didn’t have a response!

Have you ever heard this same argument before? I went back to the text and saw where it talk about Mary Magdaline in the previous paragraph, but it seems as though a new day passes before the Apostles are found hiding in the room in fear of the Jews. Any help is much appreciated! Chris
 
The problem is it does not say that Mary Magdalene was in the room that evening but only that Thomas was not in the room with the disciples. Classic misdirection tactic of protestant apologists.

God Bless
 
Here’s some help.

Apostle:


  1. *
    • Apostle One of a group made up especially of the 12 disciples chosen by Jesus to preach the gospel.
    • A missionary of the early Christian Church.
    • A leader of the first Christian mission to a country or region.
    • One of the 12 members of the administrative council in the Mormon Church.
    • One who pioneers an important reform movement, cause, or belief: an apostle of conservation.
    • A passionate adherent; a strong supporter.
    dictionary.reference.com/search?q=Apostle

    Let’s look at the context clues of the passage:

    ‘On the evening of that day, the first day of the week, the doors being shut where the disciples were, for fear of the Jews, Jesus came and stood among them and said to them, “Peace be with you.” When he had said this, he showed them his hands and his side. Then the disciples were glad when they saw the Lord. Jesus said to them again, “Peace be with you. As the Father has sent me, even so I send you.” And when he had said this, he breathed on them, and said to them, “Receive the Holy Spirit. If you forgive the sins of any, they are forgiven; if you retain the sins of any, they are retained.” Now Thomas, one of the twelve, called the Twin, was not with them when Jesus came. ‘ (John 20:19-24)

    So it seems more likely St. John was calling the Apostles, “the disciples” given how he more specifically said, “one of the twelve.” Since the Apostles were also “disciples of Christ”
 
Here’s some help.

Apostle:
    • **Apostle One of a group made up especially of the 12 disciples chosen by Jesus to preach the gospel. **
    • A missionary of the early Christian Church.
    • A leader of the first Christian mission to a country or region.
    • One of the 12 members of the administrative council in the Mormon Church.
    • One who pioneers an important reform movement, cause, or belief: an apostle of conservation.
    • A passionate adherent; a strong supporter.
    dictionary.reference.com/search?q=Apostle

    Let’s look at the context clues of the passage:

    ‘On the evening of that day, the first day of the week, the doors being shut where the disciples were, for fear of the Jews, Jesus came and stood among them and said to them, “Peace be with you.” When he had said this, he showed them his hands and his side. Then the disciples were glad when they saw the Lord. Jesus said to them again, “Peace be with you. As the Father has sent me, even so I send you.” And when he had said this, he breathed on them, and said to them, “Receive the Holy Spirit. If you forgive the sins of any, they are forgiven; if you retain the sins of any, they are retained.” Now Thomas, one of the twelve, called the Twin, was not with them when Jesus came. ‘ (John 20:19-24)

    So it seems more likely St. John was calling the Apostles, “the disciples” given how he more specifically said, “one of the twelve.” Since the Apostles were also “disciples of Christ”
 
Now here’s where Apostolic Tradition comes in:

Ignatius of Antioch

For as many as are of God and of Jesus Christ are also with the bishop. And as many as shall, in the exercise of penance, return into the unity of the Church, these, too, shall belong to God, that they may live according to Jesus Christ (Letter to the Philadelphians 3 A.D. 110]).

For where there is division and wrath, God does not dwell. To all them that repent, the Lord grants forgiveness, if they turn in penitence to the unity of God, and to communion with the bishop (ibid. 8).

Irenaeus

“[The Gnostic disciples of Marcus] have deluded many women. . . . Their consciences have been branded as with a hot iron. Some of these women make a public confession, but others are ashamed to do this, and in silence, as if withdrawing from themselves the hope of the life of God, they either apostatize entirely or hesitate between the two courses” (Against Heresies 1:22 [A.D. 189]).

Tertullian

“[Regarding confession, some] flee from this work as being an exposure of themselves, or they put it off from day to day. I presume they are more mindful of modesty than of salvation, like those who contract a disease in the more shameful parts of the body and shun making themselves known to the physicians; and thus they perish along with their own bashfulness” (Repentance 10:1 [A.D. 203]).

(So before the second century began, confessions were publicly made aloud in Church in the presence of the priest.)

catholic.com/library/Confession.asp

ORIGEN (c. 244 AD)

In addition to these [kinds of forgiveness of sins], albeit hard and laborious: the remission of sins through penance…when he [the sinner] does not shrink from declaring his sin to a priest of the lord and from seeking medicine…In this way there is fulfilled that too, which the Apostle James says: “If, then, there is anyone sick, let him call the presbyters of the Church, and let them impose hands upon him, anointing him with oil in the name of the Lord; and the prayer of faith will save the sick man, and if he be in sin, they shall be forgiven him [James 5:14-15; cf. John 20:21-23].” (Homilies on Leviticus 2:4)

CYPRIAN OF CARTHAGE (c. 250 AD)

Of how much greater faith and salutary fear are they who…confess their sins to the priests of God in a straightforward manner and in sorrow, making an open declaration of conscience… Indeed, he but sins the more if, thinking that God is like man, he believes that he can escape the punishment of his crime by not openly admitting his crime… I beseech you, brethren, let everyone who has sinned confess his sin while he is still in this world, while his confession is still admissible, while the satisfaction and remission made through the priest are still pleasing before the Lord. (The Lapsed 28)

bringyou.to/apologetics/a36.htm
 
this really is a great example of protestant redirection.

the radio guy, then, admitted that people CAN forgive sins. he changes his attack 180 degrees, and is NOW saying ‘well, sure we can. but you’re STILL doing it wrong, cuz women should be able to do it, too!’

ok, so which bit are we arguing again? please pick one argument and stick to it, mr radio guy. if we’re arguing whether or not people can forgive, then the Bible gives conclusive evidence that we can. that argument is now over.

ok, new argument - can women forgive sins? the church’s teaching is that the ability to forgive sins was given to Jesus’s disciples. His disciples were all men. even if there were 100 women IN THE ROOM when Jesus gave this ability to His disciples doesn’t mean that the women were given the ability, too. there have been 100’s of people in church when someone was being confirmed, but that doesn’t mean all of them were confirmed when the priest said the words. being present doesn’t mean being included.

so - two arguments. both shown to support the catholic view. as is always the case when we stop redirecting and pulling theological rabbits out of hats, and then chasing them. 🙂
 
<< Quidquid latine dictum sit, altum viditur ! >>

DEACON2006, my friend

The correct form is…

videtur

video, videre

3rd person present passive

Otherwise your post is flawless in every way.
 
<< NEMO ME IMPVNE LACESSIT >>

Psalm45:9, my friend

Your Latin is impeccable. Then again, considering what it means, I dare not cross you.

Bravo to you for your post!
 
40.png
jeffreedy789:
this really is a great example of protestant redirection.

the radio guy, then, admitted that people CAN forgive sins. he changes his attack 180 degrees, and is NOW saying ‘well, sure we can. but you’re STILL doing it wrong, cuz women should be able to do it, too!’
Click to expand...
Very well put, seems like he will agree with humans forgiving sins as long as women do to, anything to oppose the teaching’s of the Catholic Church.
He forgot something too, that the Sarcarment of Confession is administered by the priest, to which God ratifies in Heaven.
And it is a Sarcament that Jesus instituted.
 
Are ya sure he wasn’t a Jehovah’s witness? That is one of their favorite tactics when ya get 'em cornered on some point that they have no good answer for. You can easily beat him on the context…He really has no leg to stand on and the Church Fathers confirm it, which just shows that no one else ever had the audacity to express so\uch a lame attempt to sidetrack a valid argument. 👍
 
Hello JCFAB,

I do not think you should feel defeated. You had the fundimentalist beat and he coped out with a weak defense. A defense which all his fundimentalist listeners were happy to hear. The fundimentalists are not out to find truth, especially from Catholics. They are out to steal Catholics and gain followers and follower donations.

A fundimentalist once asked me if I was saved. I turn and ask, "What must I do to share in everlasting life? He answered, “Accept Jesus as your personal saviour.” Then I said, “No! What is the perfect answer to this question. What is Jesus’ answer to this question?”

NAB MAR 10:17
"Good Teacher, what must I do to share in everlasting life?" Jesus answered, "Why do you call me good? No one is good but God alone. You know the commandments:
’You shall not kill;
You shall not commit adultery;
You shall not steal;
You shall not bear false witness;
You shall not defraud;
Honor your father and your mother.’"

The fundimentalist responded, “Well if that was the truth, then we would all go to hell.” I said, “Scripture tells us that to obey God is to love God. We are not asked to love God perfectly. We are only asked to love God with all our hearts, with all our souls, with all our strength and with all our minds. We only need to love God, through obeying the commandments, with all our strength.”

The fundimentalist responded, “Don’t you think that God would want some men on earth to explain His will. We (the fundimentalists) are here to lead and explain God’s will. We know that if what Jesus is saying is true, then we would all go to hell. We follow what St. Paul says (faith alone)…” All of his followers just shook their heads in agreement and relief that he did not let this Catholic beat him in Scripture.

I think you can see the similairity with your own encounter. The fundimentalists put on this grand illusion by toteing their bibles and constantly quoting scripture regardless of logic.

You were great in using scripture to counter the fundimentalists. If Catholics are going to do battle with the fundimentalists, they must use scripture. Using Aquinas, Agustine and the Caticism against the fundimentalist, only solidifies their beliefs that Catholics do not follow the bible.

Try to have a diversified audience when debating fundimentalists. If you are only talking to fundimentalists, they will always use these little diversionary tactics to display themselves as the winner. This is not easily done when the audience is not all fundimentalists. It was not that Jesus used scripture to point out the errors of the Pharisees that caused them to hate Him. It was that Jesus did so in front of the sinners, prostitutes and tax collectors that caused the Pharisees’ emense hatred for Him to the point of initiating His death.

Peace in Christ,
Steven Merten
www.ILOVEYOUGOD.com
 
‘You were great in using scripture to counter the fundimentalists. If Catholics are going to do battle with the fundimentalists, they must use scripture.’

couple things - one, we should all try to remember the thing that we’ve been taught by the highest authority, and reminded so effectively by cs lewis: that our chief commandment regarding fundies (and muslims, and atheists, and everyone else) is the same thing that bono says you do to dismantle an atomic bomb - love. yes, we should correct, we should reproach, we should teach, we should adjure. but, above all, we should love.

two - one other thing to remember when in dialogue with fundamentalists is to spell your words correctly. 🙂
 
adnauseum said:
<< Quidquid latine dictum sit, altum viditur ! >>

The correct form is…
videtur
Click to expand...

Thank you, the last time I took a latin class was 1975. I accept this correction but as our thistled psalmist offers in this string << NEMO ME IMPVNE LACESSIT >> 😃

God Bless
 
The Sacrament of Confession played a big part in my choosing to join the Catholic Church in the early 90’s. I literally had a book that compared all of the major Christian Demoniations comparing what each had to offer as far as sacraments. I saw none other that listed “Confession” in the same way as the Roman Catholic Church.
 
‘Demoniations’

that’s a rather telling spelling of that word… 😉
 
In St John chap 20 verse 19

it says

Now when it was late that same day

It was a misinterpretation of course - Mary Magdelen went and told the disciples that she had seen the lord, and then

the above verse comes in.

She was NOT in the room…
 
Not only was it very late in the day when this passage occurs, but when Mary went to tell the disciples, it was early morning, so early it was still dark (at least when she first checked the tomb). It never says she went to tell them in that room, and even if she did, the only possibility that she was still in the room is that they all just sat around in the room for the course of an entire day. The only way I’ll buy that is if Scripture mentions there was a big RISK game going on.
 
John 20:21-23; Jesus is fulfilling the old promise made to Peter and the Apostles in Matt 16:19 and Matt 18:18.

When asked about confession by protestants I usually like to use Paul and John. It goes something like this; First of all Catholics do not tell their sins to a priest “instead of to God”, but to God through a priest, appointed by our Lord as his representative operating in the ‘person of Christ’ (2Cor2:10) through the ministry of reconciliation (2Cor 5:18). These ‘earthly’ priest are “Christ 's ambassadors” (2Cor5:20) doing nothing of themselves but ministering in obedience to the commands of Christ. Did not our Lord say to the Apostles "when you forgive men’s sins, they are forgiven, when you hold them bound, they are held bound (John 20:22-23)? And how can they forgive sins if they are not confessed?
 
jeffreedy789 said:
‘You were great in using scripture to counter the fundimentalists. If Catholics are going to do battle with the fundimentalists, they must use scripture.’

couple things - one, we should all try to remember the thing that we’ve been taught by the highest authority, and reminded so effectively by cs lewis: that our chief commandment regarding fundies (and muslims, and atheists, and everyone else) is the same thing that bono says you do to dismantle an atomic bomb - love. yes, we should correct, we should reproach, we should teach, we should adjure. but, above all, we should love.

two - one other thing to remember when in dialogue with fundamentalists is to spell your words correctly. 🙂
Click to expand...

ROTFL!!! Wow. Quoting Bono. That’s almost as good as quoting Latin & the Fathers & the Bible…it’s up there.😃 :cool: 👍
 
40.png
JCFAB:
So, I was on my local Anti-Catholic Fundamentalist radio talk show in Denver, Colorado the other day. The previous caller raised the objection that it is “biblically” incorrect for Catholics to go to Confession to a priest. “Only God can forgive sins and I don’t need to go to some man to ask for God’s forgiveness!” the called resounded.

Well, after having read and severly marked up Karl’s “Catholicism & Fundamentalism”, my monthly addiction to THIS ROCK, and my budget breaking devotion to buying every book from Ignatius Press, I was up next on the show and feeling GOOD!

“Read John 20:19-23” I said. I continued, “Jesus breathed the Holy Spirit into the Apostles and sent them on the same mission the Father sent HIM on; to bring forgiveness of sins to the world! Jesus gave them the authority to forgive or retain sins. I don’t imagine Jesus just wanted these 11 Apostles to pass away with this God-given authority and not pass it on to their successors!” As I finished my explanation, I stopped to catch my breath and listened for the radio host’s response. He quickly went to a break.

He returned by saying, “Mary Magdaline was also in the room with the disciples in John 20:19-23. If what Catholics believe is true, then women should also be able to forgive sins, right?” I was dumbfounded… I didn’t have a response. The Radio host thanked me for calling in and then hung up the phone. I dropped my head in confusion and filled with a sense of defeat. I didn’t have a response!

Have you ever heard this same argument before? I went back to the text and saw where it talk about Mary Magdaline in the previous paragraph, but it seems as though a new day passes before the Apostles are found hiding in the room in fear of the Jews. Any help is much appreciated! Chris
Click to expand...
Fundamentalists and Catholics do not view scripture in the same way. Fundamentalists take it word for word as the literal Word of God and this presupposition causes them to misinterpret such passages and devise their own doctrines which are often at odds with what has been expressly and traditionally taught. Whether Mary Magdalene was in the room or not, it is clear that she was not given the same priestly authority to forgive sins which has been passed down from the Apostles. Mary Magdalen may have been a disciple, but she was certainly not an Apostle.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top