Do Catholic priests have the authority to forgive sins on earth?

  • Thread starter Thread starter guanophore
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
G

guanophore

Guest
This off topic discussion was taken from a thread that is now closed.
david_ruiz said:
When Jesus died ,one of the gospels records that the veil (thick, ,thick curtain,separating the holy of holies part of the temple ,where only the high priest could go in ,once a year ,with a rope tied to his foot ,to be pulled if he fainted or worse ,cause anyone else would perish ,WAS TORN IN TWO .Hence Paul in on of his epistles allude to this and says we ,every believer , can now go into the presence of God boldlythe middle wall of partition being done away with ,hence ,I believe no priestly class -no more sacrifice- but yes we are all priests in His fellowship.
Click to expand...
Did you think this was different from what Catholics believe?
david_ruiz said:
Code: 
I do know the greek manuscripts were cannonized ,not latin and they have a word for priests and a totally different word for presbyter ,I believe to show two different functions ,testaments -a new thing apart from the O.T.
Click to expand...
Do you mean you think there is a different Latin root word for “priest” than “presbyter”?

You may be thinking of “sacredote”? This would be the Latin equivalent for the OT priest,the hierus.

The NT reveals what was forshadowed in the Old. there is a High Priest, a ministerial priesthood, and the priesthood of all believers.
david_ruiz said:
Yes ,this is what I was referring too,your 3 priests -One Christ, the other two ,of men (ministerial and all believers).
Click to expand...
Well, this would be one foundation of the problem. There is only one priesthood in the NT, not “3 priests”. This One Priesthood is that of Christ, after the order of Melchizedek. All the rest of us, the priestly people, and the ministerial priests, are caught up and contained in the One.
david_ruiz said:
Just disagree because of Hebrews showing not a foreshadow in O.T. but a total doing away with the old ,hence something new ,
Click to expand...
I think that Hebrews makes plenty of references to the OT shadow, as well as the NT fulfillment. The priesthood after the order of Melchizedek is, indeed, a different kind of priesthood. It is not caste, lineage, or race based, and it is eternal.
david_ruiz said:
where indeed we are all priests in every sense of the new testament word .no we are all not elders /presbyters .We all have different giftings ,I experienced a great divide between laity and priests in the catholic church .a separation ,much as I imagine Jews did from the scribes and pharisees etc.
Click to expand...
There are many people who had this expereince. However, have you ever considered that your personal experience may not be the best plumbline for Truth?
david_ruiz said:
Understand ,just sadly disagree.I believe we are all called to be like Christ ,to perform a miracle ,to teach ,preach to baptize ,but giftings lend us to one thing more than another ,but it is not by a formal appointment ,with boundaries that you may have( where only a priest can do such and such)
Click to expand...
Such a perspective is inconsistent with the Scriptures and the faith of the early Church.
 
david_ruiz said:
Not in the Catholic sense.I believe if someone offended an apostle they confessed and asked forgiveness.I believe if they had a sin problem they may have confessed and asked for prayer .But no ,I do not believe ,you went up to an apostle to confess “sin” per say .Scripture says, “Confess your FAULTS ONE TO ANOTHER.” That is for the priesthood of all saints, the epistle does NOT say confess you faults to you presbyter ,or to an ordained one.
Click to expand...
I think you have missed the context of the instruction. Anyhow, even if you were going to confess your sins to another, why would you NOT choose one to whom Jesus gave the power to remit them?
david_ruiz said:
I never understood retaining/forgiving as the confessional, but the accepting or rejecting of Christ’s atonement for sin ,on the cross.I believe the gospels interchange the two .
Click to expand...
It appears your Catholic formation was very poor, then.

The remission of sins that occurs in the confessional is, indeed, based upon accepting or rejecing Christ’s atonement for sin on the cross.

We are all called to preach the gospel, and if that was all there was to retaining and forgiving sins, then there would never have been a need for this further instructions on forgiving and retaining, would there?
david_ruiz said:
I do not believe there are further instructions on this .
Click to expand...
Jesus instruction to the Apostles on retaining and remitting sins was separate from those of preaching the gospel.
david_ruiz said:
Ther eis on confessing faults ,which is different from confessing sins. Confessing my faults to you about being a dull bell because of lack of love on these threads-forgive me ,pray for me ,has nothing to do with retaining/forgiving ,cause Christ will forgive me whether you do or not or whether I confess it or not. His blood washes it away because He granted me faith to appropriate it.
Click to expand...
I think you lost me here, David. How is a fault different than a sin?

I agree, though, Christ will forgive you if you repent, whether I do, or not. Confession is the means by which his cleansing blood is appropriated.

Then you have the added difficulty of explaining why the Apostles misunderstood Jesus, and taught their disciples to misunderstand, and why God was so weak and disinterested that He could not correct the Church for 1500 years.
david_ruiz said:
I believe when there is error ,God is not lax to send a messenger with His message of correction. I understand your 1500 years , but in most errors cut that time in half , (your 1500 is a generalization). You forget the smaller groups that held some protestant views since from the 3rd century on ,and forerunners to the reformation ,and the Waldeneses(?) ,Albigesnses,Orthodox etc.etc.
Click to expand...
No, the 1500 is not a “generalization”. The Reformers 500 years ago felt the need to jettison the Catholic priesthood, so they formulated other theories about what the scriptures could mean, like that forgiving and remitting sins has to do with preaching the gospel. 🤷

If God is not lax, then why did He not send “correction” to the Orthodox, who have also received the same teaching we have from the Apostles?
 
We see here the personal opinions of those who have devolved into Do-It-Yourself Christianity. Their (name of prominent cable preacher) “signature edition” bible gives them absolute doctrinal authority. They are now the pope of their own “Heaven Depot”. But, who enforces the building code on these remodels of the Gospel?
 
Catholic priests have the authority to pronounce the words when Christ forgives sins. The priest himself does not confer any of the sacraments, but instead Christ acts through the priest to confer the sacraments.
 
Zenas said:
How do you explain John 20:21-23? Also Matthew 9:2-8?
Click to expand...
The disciples: where they the 11 disciples Jesus’ closest one’s or the many who were disciples of Jesus. It don’t say. What is a disciple? A student. And Jesus had many disciples.other then the 12.

Now if you sin against me do I not have the power to forgive you for sinning against me and do I not have the power not to forgive you for sinning against me?

It sometimes takes the faith of others to bring us to Christ. It wasn’t the men who forgave the sin but Jesus. It was their faith the brought the man to Christ. So I ask you what Jesus asked, "Which is easier to say, your sins are forgiven or to say get up and walk? Why did Jesus ask this question?
 
po18guy said:
And James 5:15-16. How many ways does he want it?
Click to expand...
As many ways as you want to give it.
James 5:15-16 says,“And the prayer offered in faith will make the sick person well; the Lord will raise him up. If he has sinned, he will be forgiven. Therefore confess your sins to each other so that you may be healed. The prayer of a righteous man is powerful and effective.” Here I see that we should confess our sins to each other what I don’t see is the words to a priest..
 
po18guy said:
So, you, rev kevin, speak with the voice and authority of God, when you pronounce against the bible on this subject?
Click to expand...
Maybe I do and maybe I don’t. You really don’t know.
Does not the Bible say that God is the only one who can forgive sin?
 
rev_kevin said:
Maybe I do and maybe I don’t. You really don’t know.
Does not the Bible say that God is the only one who can forgive sin?
Click to expand...
No, it doesn’t, and Jesus rebuked some Pharisees who made exactly that assertion.

[BIBLEDRB]Matthew 9:1-8[/BIBLEDRB]
 
Cat_Herder said:
[BIBLEDRB]2 Corinthians 2:10[/BIBLEDRB]

How can Paul pardon sins in the person of Christ?
Click to expand...
Ok now lets start from 2 Cor 1 “If anyone has caused grief, he has not so much grieved me as he has grieved all of you, to some extent–not to put it too severely. The punishment inflicted on him by the majority is sufficient for him. Now instead, you ought to forgive and comfort him, so that he will not be overwhelmed by excessive sorrow… If you forgive anyone…I have also forgiven him. and what I have forgiven…I have forgiven in the sight of Christ.”
Here we see that we also have the power to forgive someone. But God has the ultimit power to forgive sins or not.
 
rev_kevin said:
The disciples: where they the 11 disciples Jesus’ closest one’s or the many who were disciples of Jesus. It don’t say.
Click to expand...
You’re right, the text itself doesn’t necessarily say one way or the other. So, on what basis can you say that it necessarily wasn’t just the Apostles? Not that this is dispositive of whether priests can forgive sins in God’s name.

Sam, the Neon Orange Knight
 
rev_kevin said:
Here we see that we also have the power to forgive someone. But God has the ultimit power to forgive sins or not.
Click to expand...
That’s true, but ultimately irrelevant to the question of whether God gives His power of forgiveness to His priests.

Sam, the Neon Orange Knight
 
rev_kevin said:
Ok now lets start from 2 Cor 1 “If anyone has caused grief, he has not so much grieved me as he has grieved all of you, to some extent–not to put it too severely. The punishment inflicted on him by the majority is sufficient for him. Now instead, you ought to forgive and comfort him, so that he will not be overwhelmed by excessive sorrow… If you forgive anyone…I have also forgiven him. and what I have forgiven…I have forgiven in the sight of Christ.”
Here we see that we also have the power to forgive someone. But God has the ultimit power to forgive sins or not.
Click to expand...
Most of the translations say “in the PERSON of Christ” or “with the AUTHORITY of Christ.” Only the modern translations change it to “presence.”

New Living Translation (©2007)
When you forgive this man, I forgive him, too. And when I forgive whatever needs to be forgiven, I do so with Christ’s authority for your benefit,

King James Bible
To whom ye forgive any thing, I [forgive] also: for if I forgave any thing, to whom I forgave [it], for your sakes [forgave I it] in the person of Christ;

American King James Version
To whom you forgive any thing, I forgive also: for if I forgave any thing, to whom I forgave it, for your sakes forgave I it in the person of Christ;

Bible in Basic English
But if you give forgiveness to anyone, I do the same: for if I have given forgiveness for anything, I have done it because of you, in the person of Christ;

Douay-Rheims Bible
And to whom you have pardoned any thing, I also. For, what I have pardoned, if I have pardoned any thing, for your sakes have I done it in the person of Christ.

Darby Bible Translation
But to whom ye forgive anything, I also; for I also, what I have forgiven, if I have forgiven anything, it is for your sakes in the person of Christ;

English Revised Version
But to whom ye forgive anything, I forgive also: for what I also have forgiven, if I have forgiven anything, for your sakes have I forgiven it in the person of Christ;

Webster’s Bible Translation
To whom ye forgive any thing, I forgive also: for if I forgave any thing, to whom I forgave it, for your sakes I forgave it, in the person of Christ;

Young’s Literal Translation
And to whom ye forgive anything – I also; for I also, if I have forgiven anything, to whom I have forgiven it, because of you – in the person of Christ – I forgive it,
 
Ne_OrangeKnight said:
You’re right, the text itself doesn’t necessarily say one way or the other. So, on what basis can you say that it necessarily wasn’t just the Apostles?

Sam, the Neon Orange Knight
Click to expand...
Don’t miss quote me I said, were they the 11 disciples Jesus’ closest ones or the many who were disciples of Jesus. I didn’t necessarily say it wasn’t the Apostles now did I?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top