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

[FidesSpesCarita]

They never had a chance to reject either .Or be baptized ? Is that why infant baptism took time to catch on, that it was not from the beginning(because you had to believe) ? Whatever happened to Limbo, that is what the Catholic Church taught me .

Actually, if you read the “Confessions” of St. Augustine he has a quote (I might not have it exact, but its close enough to get the point) “Make me holy Lord, just not yet”. The idea behind delaying baptism was that, since baptism washes away our sins, you should get all your sinning done before baptism since confessing at the time was a public (i.e. in front of the entire congregation!!!) event and reconciliation could take years in some cases.

 

[Cat_Herder]

They never had a chance to reject either

Hence salvation is not by faith alone.

.Or be baptized ? Is that why infant baptism took time to catch on, that it was not from the beginning(because you had to believe) ? Whatever happened to Limbo, that is what the Catholic Church taught me .

The only way to be saved is through the grace of Jesus Christ. Christ made the Sacraments but did not make them the only means of obtaining grace–just the ordinary ones, the ones which must be used by those who can use them. So He can and does save people who are invincibly ignorant of the need to be baptized (or receive the Eucharist) and this has been a[ constant teaching of the Church. ](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Invincible ignorance fallacy)

Limbo, however, was never a teaching of the Church but a theory put out by some theologians.

 

[PRmerger]

It is a paradigm the Lord expounded on,that it exists, and beware .Yes ,very chilling ,and hopefully to the one whose shoes it fits.

Think about this, david. You are proposing that one could be in this person’s shoes *but have no idea. *

This person could be you.

 

[Jenny4Him]

It is good that you see this. The Catholic priests do not forgive on their own authority either.

Now you are either sidestepping, lying or ignorant IMO. A Catholic priest can’t forgive a single sin anymore than Peter or Paul could forgive a single sin. Let us examine what the RCC claims for herself.

---

Lesson 24: The Sacrament of Penance (Confession) -Based on John 20:19-23**
4) Did Jesus Christ give anyone the power to forgive sin?**
** Yes, to His Apostles on Easter Sunday night.**** “Whose sins you shall forgive, they are forgiven them; and whose sins you shall retain, they are retained.”** ** (John 20:23)

---

1. Does the priests only pray that your sins will be forgiven?**** No, the priest, by the power given him, actually takes the sins off your soul (called **“absolution”). “For what I have pardoned… I have done it in the person of Christ.” ** (2 Corinthians 2:10) Source:**That is astounding that a priest can remove the sins off one’s soul. Neither Peter, John or any Apostles could do that, but a RC priest can do that…wow! This is why when I challenged you or anyone to find a single example of Peter or Paul forgiving a single sin by their authority that you claim was a) given to them, b) passed along and c) now resides with the RCC. Who needs Jesus if that were true? No one

You see if you read the Bible and come across passages like John 20:19-23 and do not put them in light of the whole of Scripture you get error. Mark 2:7 & Luke 5:21 would clearly be in contradiction because they say ONLY GOD can forgive sins. Add in Matthew 18:18 where Jesus is speaking to His “learners” /disciples and tells them whatever you bind on earth will be bound in heaven, and whatever you loose on earth will be loosed in heaven. - it gets somewhat confusing for the person who doesn’t pray for wisdom in understanding of the Scripture routinely and thus does not recognize apparent contradictions that must be resolved. This would be most “so-called” Christians regardless of denomination; the result is a many different Jesus’s and many different gospel rather than the one true gospel written on the pages of Scripture.

Here is the resolution: The gospel received in the heart is to receive remission of all sins and rejection of the gospel is to retain one’s sins. Any true believer can do exactly what the apostles did and what Jesus commanded all of His disciples to do. Go throughout the world and proclaim the gospel; the Holy Spirit will do the rest.

---

Only God forgives sin
1441 Only God forgives sins.39 Since he is the Son of God, Jesus says of himself, “The Son of man has authority on earth to forgive sins” and exercises this divine power: "Your sins are forgiven."40 Further, by virtue of his divine authority he gives this power to men to exercise in his name.41
1442 Christ has willed that in her prayer and life and action his whole Church should be the sign and instrument of the forgiveness and reconciliation that he acquired for us at the price of his blood. But he entrusted the exercise of the power of absolution to the apostolic ministry which he charged with the "ministry of reconciliation."42 The apostle is sent out “on behalf of Christ” with “God making his appeal” through him and pleading: "Be reconciled to God."43
Reconciliation with the Church
1443 During his public life Jesus not only forgave sins, but also made plain the effect of this forgiveness: he reintegrated forgiven sinners into the community of the People of God from which sin had alienated or even excluded them. A remarkable sign of this is the fact that Jesus receives sinners at his table, a gesture that expresses in an astonishing way both God’s forgiveness and the return to the bosom of the People of God.44
1444 In imparting to his apostles his own power to forgive sins the Lord also gives them the authority to reconcile sinners with the Church. This ecclesial dimension of their task is expressed most notably in Christ’s solemn words to Simon Peter: "I will give you the keys of the kingdom of heaven, and whatever you bind on earth shall be bound in heaven, and whatever you loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven."45 "The office of binding and loosing which was given to Peter was also assigned to the college of the apostles united to its head."46
1445 The words bind and loose mean: whomever you exclude from your communion, will be excluded from communion with God; whomever you receive anew into your communion, God will welcome back into his. *Reconciliation with the Church is inseparable from reconciliation with God. *
The sacrament of forgiveness

So the problem here is that 1441 is true, while 1444 & 1445 contradict 1441; both cannot be true and in light of Mark 2:7 & and Luke 5:21; not to mention that forgiveness glorifies God and not forgiving also glorifies God and God said He gives His glory to no one, we have serious doctrinal contradictions. But only a true disciple of Jesus can discern these things according to 1 Corinthians 2.

Again; show one example where an Apostle forgave a sin by their authority.

 

[PRmerger]

Now you are either sidestepping, lying or ignorant IMO. A Catholic priest can’t forgive a single sin anymore than Peter or Paul could forgive a single sin. Let us examine what the RCC claims for herself.

Jenny,
Do you believe that Peter and Paul worked miracles?

Do you think Peter and Paul wrote the inspired words of God?

Do you think Moses wrote the Torah?

Clearly, my point is that which you attribute to these holy men, you can also attribute to God.

Same with the Sacrament of Confession.

 

[Jenny4Him]

Jenny,
Do you believe that Peter and Paul worked miracles?

Do you think Peter and Paul wrote the inspired words of God?

Do you think Moses wrote the Torah?

Clearly, my point is that which you attribute to these holy men, you can also attribute to God.

Same with the Sacrament of Confession.

Keep on side-stepping; I won’t bother you about this anymore; it is obvious that 1) you do not intend to answer the question(s) and 2) you have no biblical basis on which to stand to answer the question and 3) you need to read the Scripture in earnest. So have a good spiritual life and i wish you the best in whatever you do.

 

[PRmerger]

Keep on side-stepping; I won’t bother you about this anymore; it is obvious that 1) you do not intend to answer the question(s) and 2) you have no biblical basis on which to stand to answer the question and 3) you need to read the Scripture in earnest. So have a good spiritual life and i wish you the best in whatever you do.

Please do not go away from this conversation, dear Jenny.

It is clear that you have been misinformed about the Catholic Church.

 

[Cat_Herder]

Now you are either sidestepping, lying or ignorant IMO. A Catholic priest can’t forgive a single sin anymore than Peter or Paul could forgive a single sin.

[BIBLEDRB]2 Cor 2:10[/BIBLEDRB]

 

[FidesSpesCarita]

Keep on side-stepping; I won’t bother you about this anymore; it is obvious that 1) you do not intend to answer the question(s) and 2) you have no biblical basis on which to stand to answer the question and 3) you need to read the Scripture in earnest. So have a good spiritual life and i wish you the best in whatever you do.

Do not mistake your disagreement with our explanations as… well, here I will requote it

1. you do not intend to answer the question(s) and 2) you have no biblical basis on which to stand to answer the question and 3) you need to read the Scripture in earnest.

Because 1) we have answered your questions, see Cat Herder below
2) There is strong biblical basis if you but have eyes to see
3) Do not presume that we do not read the scriptures in earnest. Disagreement does not mean that the other is not earnest. Heck, there are lots of Constitutional scholars who disagree with the President (also a constitutional scholar) on his interpretation of the Constitution, but that does not mean that either party is not “earnest” in their reading.

[BIBLEDRB]2 Cor 2:10[/BIBLEDRB]

 

[Nicea325]

Keep on side-stepping; I won’t bother you about this anymore; it is obvious that 1) you do not intend to answer the question(s) and 2) you have no biblical basis on which to stand to answer the question and 3) you need to read the Scripture in earnest. So have a good spiritual life and i wish you the best in whatever you do.

No bibilical basis? Does the name Jesus ring a bell?

 

[david_ruiz]

Everyone’s sins are forgiven when they believe?

Pretty much.

I ask them of you who have divorced yourself from the faith taught by the Apostles.

That is the debate isn’t it .Did the apostles really hold “confession” .Remember, earliest accounts of "confession’ are “one to another”,that is ,in front of or at the “assembly”.

Says that you must either
-say the Sinner’s prayer out loud or in front of a witness or on your knees or in a church. If you say it once you need never say it again? What if you said it but then decided you wanted to recant? What if you said it conditionally?

In other words, what must be done/said and how in order to know your sins are forgiven when you say (or think?) the Sinner’s Prayer.

Here’s my gnawing question at the moment, david:

Must one say the Sinner’s Prayer out loud, or can he just think it in his head in order for his sins to be forgiven?

The sinners prayer is for “salvation” ,regeneration ,new birth ,born again .Then there is the sanctification ,the washing as we continue in the new birth .To which do you have questions ? AS far as any prayer ,i suppose God can hear a roar or a whisper,and knows the intent of the heart,even our thoughts .The more all good things are dependent on God ,the less trouble I am with you .The more I have to define what man must do ,the waters get murky,for the formulas and circumstances etc are endless.

 

[PRmerger]

The sinners prayer is for “salvation” ,regeneration ,new birth ,born again .Then there is the sanctification ,the washing as we continue in the new birth .To which do you have questions ? AS far as any prayer ,i suppose God can hear a roar or a whisper,and knows the intent of the heart,even our thoughts .

Interesting.

So one does not even need to confess the Sinner’s prayer out loud. No witnesses. Except of course God. But, as you stated, the Sinner can be fooled about this.

Quite curious indeed!

The more all good things are dependent on God ,the less trouble I am with you .The more I have to define what man must do ,the waters get murky,for the formulas and circumstances etc are endless.

This, again, david, is another man-made tradition you’re following. For you have not read this “the more I have to define what man must do” paradigm in any pages of Scripture. You’ve been told this by a fallible pastor perhaps? Or if not, by whom?

 

[david_ruiz]

Yuppers. Spot on here in your fear of this paradigm. It is one of the reasons I fled home across the Tiber as if the devil was on my tail.

 

[david_ruiz]

Yuppers. Spot on here in your fear of this paradigm. It is one of the reasons I fled home across the Tiber as if the devil was on my tail.

You made me think and try to remember discusions on these verses.Some say "water " is for baptism (John’s baptism-?) - could be. Some say it is the Word as Peter infers (1 Peter 1:23) - maybe. Some say it refers to fleshly birth -the breaking of water -the mother’s , most probable .He cites two things to be born from or of (water and spirit) ,and two things are born( flesh and spirit).Flesh is definitely born of water.Many protestants also believe in the necessity of water baptism . I do not , except as a matter of obedience or as stated earlier ,a positive “reaction” to his already "goodness ".

Well, lets look very briefly at this. John had already instituted the baptism of water (repentance) to illustrate our death to sin and rebirth to new life, albeit not in the Holy Spirit.

Does not fit. How can you have new birth without the Spirit ? John’s baptism was for new life ? John’s baptism was for the remission of sins and was seen as a preparation for the Life-Giver. There may have been old testament regeneration because of John , but it is not specifically alluded to. I do not see his ministry of water baptism as "affectual " in regards to regeneration, as I do not see it for now either. But his words ,his message ,that could be cleansing , a washing by the “Word”.

 

[PRmerger]

Anyways ,forgiveness in the confessional is conditional also ,is it not ?.

Absolutely.

But one never leaves the confessional being mistaken and thinking his sins are forgiven when they are not.

That, david, is a paradigm created by the Author of Chaos and Confusion himself. Would this not be the greatest work of mischief–“Let’s make a Christian think he’s forgiven when he’s really not. Then he’s mine for eternity!”

Is everyone who hears the structured absolution absolved in your church?

Absolutely. When the absolution is given one knows with certainty that his sins are absolved!

Should not some indeed fear the Lord , for it may be the beginning of an epiphany ?

Does the one who thinks he’s forgiven but really is not have fear of the Lord? No! Because he thinks he’s forgiven.

That’s exactly our point, david. This poor bloke is thinking he’s fine, having no fear of the Lord, when he ought to be quite concerned!

 

[david_ruiz]

Then who is your teacher? And you really shouldnt say the bible here, since the bible is a (relatively) static document which lacks the required faculties (namely the ability to perform any action, verb, of which teach is but one commonly attributed to inanimate objects in a misplaced desire to apply anthropomorphic values to them).

 

[Jenny4Him]

Please do not go away from this conversation, dear Jenny.

It is clear that you have been misinformed about the Catholic Church.

Are you calling me ignorant and only politely saying “misinformed”? That is insulting.
You already tried to insult my intelligence by saying that Catholic priests do not make the claim to forgive sins, which you knew when you said it what the catechism teaches contrary to what you actually posted and I proved you wrong from your own catechism and then showed you how the catechism contradicts, not only itself, but the biblical record. Someone did not like that and blah blah blah.

 

[FidesSpesCarita]

FidesSpesCarita;7315049:

God with a big stick is a paradigm for all religions.Christainity is not a religion.That is funny, I crossed the Tiber in the other direction for “relief”.I guess you never heard of “once saved always saved” ,that some teach ,except catholics ,who speak against "assurance ", in place of “hope”. Would you rather have "assurance " of forgiveness or “hope” ? Anyways ,forgiveness in the confessional is conditional also ,is it not ?.Is everyone who hears the structured absolution absolved in your church? Finally ,please do not misapply this paradigm . Should not some indeed fear the Lord , for it may be the beginning of an epiphany ?

See, I always saw “God with a big stick” in my churches as a protestant with their “Do this or be damned” attitude. In the Catholic Church it is a “Do this to come to Heaven and when you fall, look I have provided 7 sacraments for you to refresh and renew you in My Spirit!”

Christianity absolutely is a religion. Religion, correctly defined (hard to find people that feel this way anymore) is giving that Glory to God which is naturally due to Him.

Oh, I used to be a “OSAS” branded christian. That was until I found it nowhere in scriptures and nowhere in history before the reformers. If the apostles didnt teach (and preached specifically against it at times) it I can be relatively assured that Christ did not teach it.

Ah, the conditional absolution issue. Confession is conditional on repentance. That is all. I you have true repentance for your sins, they are absolved. If you have partial repentance, something else (I havent looked into this a whole lot so forgive my weak understanding). The difference between the Catholic view and the OSAS view is that if a Catholic goes to confession every day but never has true repentance, true contrition, he KNOWS what he has to do to come back into Gods Grace. If an OSAS Christian says the sinners prayer once and thinks “Hey, Im saved now no matter what I do”, just imagine how sick that path can be. Not all OSAS’ers are like that but I have known more than a few in my time.

Fear of the Lord is the beginning of wisdom, yes.

Does not fit. How can you have new birth without the Spirit ? John’s baptism was for new life ? John’s baptism was for the remission of sins and was seen as a preparation for the Life-Giver. There may have been old testament regeneration because of John , but it is not specifically alluded to. I do not see his ministry of water baptism as "affectual " in regards to regeneration, as I do not see it for now either. But his words ,his message ,that could be cleansing , a washing by the “Word”.

Ah, but that is not scriptural

[BIBLEDRB]John 3:5[/BIBLEDRB]
[BIBLEDRB]Mark 1:4-8[/BIBLEDRB]
[BIBLEDRB]John 1:33[/BIBLEDRB]
[BIBLEDRB]1 Peter 3:18-22[/BIBLEDRB]
[BIBLEDRB]John 1:25-29[/BIBLEDRB]

FidesSpesCarita;7315049:

Oh ,fountains of living waters ,where are you ? Such a dry statement of the Word ,there is even a Living Word .Words are not static .The Spirit discerns ALL things .He teaches us, not just the apostles .He brings things to remembrance ,not just for the apostles. He uses all things ,like my parents ,teachers ,nuns ,priests ,catechisms, pastors ,preachers , brothers and sisters ,in Christ,past and present, and last but not least ,here goes , the Bible (preferably the King James) -that is my list.

The Word of God is living, He is Christ Himself. You may disagree that the bible is a static (unchanging) document, but I wouldnt try to change it if I were you.

Just as an aside, what is your reason for the “Preferably King James”? Personal thing or do you consider it to be more accurate? I for instance prefer the Douay-Rheims on a personal level.

 

[Ne_OrangeKnight]

FidesSpesCarita;7315049:

God with a big stick is a paradigm for all religions.Christainity is not a religion.That is funny, I crossed the Tiber in the other direction for “relief”.I guess you never heard of “once saved always saved” ,that some teach ,except catholics ,who speak against "assurance ", in place of “hope”. Would you rather have "assurance " of forgiveness or “hope” ? Anyways ,forgiveness in the confessional is conditional also ,is it not ?.Is everyone who hears the structured absolution absolved in your church? Finally ,please do not misapply this paradigm . Should not some indeed fear the Lord , for it may be the beginning of an epiphany ?

Problem is, it’s not about what I would rather have; it’s about what God actually does. And I do have assurance that if I die in a state of grace, I will attain Heaven (after, perhaps, a stint in Purgatory). But Jesus never promised that all who cry out, “Lord, Lord!” will reach the Kingdom. And you’ll never find “once saved, always saved” anywhere in the Bible.

Sam, the Neon Orange Knight

 

[david_ruiz]

Actually, if you read the “Confessions” of St. Augustine he has a quote (I might not have it exact, but its close enough to get the point) “Make me holy Lord, just not yet”. The idea behind delaying baptism was that, since baptism washes away our sins, you should get all your sinning done before baptism since confessing at the time was a public (i.e. in front of the entire congregation!!!) event and reconciliation could take years in some cases.

Thanks .Fascinating .I have read also (Catholic historian) ,that first churches had two parts ,one for baptized and one for catechumens. People understood baptism for remission of sins ,and as you allude , no penance. Some even preferred to wait till deathbed and for sure have a good washing before death .Did they not have confessionals yet ? Seems superstitious or at least not well grounded in truth -had a lot of heathen converts at once also. It is strange because the catechumen were “believers’”, which to me is born again , regenerated, yet they were not baptized nor partook of any sacrament, and they could do this for years .Weird. With the practice of infant baptism ,catechumens diminished and churches had only one part for all. As far as our topic hear , is it one wrong to think that the sacrament or practice of the confessional was not from the first ? It certainly was not like it is today .Yet your dogma is very important , that you would think as it is today would go all the way back ,but it does not.Many things do -baptism,communion, reading scripture , but the sacrament of penance has a much weaker link ,in my estimation.