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.
The Explanation of the Baltimore Catechism
Concerning the Salvation of Non-Catholics


orginally published in 1891
by Rev. Thomas L. Kinkead


This is interesting and speaks of the comparison between the ability of a Catholic priest ot forgive sins and the fact that a Protestant minister cannot, which a true protestant minister, the thought would never enter his mind in the first place.

According to this; David, MD and myself are damned (not saved) because we are here and have seen what all of you have written (exposed to Catholic precepts) and none of us believe that Scripture teaches that the Catholic church is the true church because we are not Catholic. So unless we convert to Catholicism, we are damned. Interesting. We certainly could not be called Christians according to this because by nature a Christian is one who is saved, being saved and will be saved and we are disqualified according to this. Unless the Catholic tradition has changed since 1891.
The Catholic teaching *Extra Ecclesiam Nulla Salus *has not changed. It has been the constant teaching of the Church; indeed, it is the teaching of Christ, for it claims nothing more than, and nothing less than, what Jesus claimed for Himself–that He is the Way, the Truth and the Life.

So to the degree that you reject His Church, is the degree that you reject Him.

However, how much of what you reject is a figment of your own imagination, is not for any of us to judge.
 
According to this; David, MD and myself are damned (not saved)
If you cannot even answer where Scripture is in the Mass (see reference to your post below) you are most likely suffering from “invincible ignorance.”

Ignorance is a bummer, I might add. :sad_yes:
As far as the other question about the Mass; i’m not clear on what you are asking…so i’ll just go with i don’t know.
So unless we convert to Catholicism, we are damned
No, Jenny. Extra Ecclesiam Nulla Salus does not mean “unless you convert to Catholicism you are damned.”

See? What you are objecting to–this imaginary Catholic Church–does not even exist.
We certainly could not be called Christians according to this because by nature a Christian is one who is saved, being saved and will be saved and we are disqualified according to this. Unless the Catholic tradition has changed since 1891.
That is the same claim that Catholics make, so you have assented to the faith here.

Catholics have been saved, are being saved, and hope to be saved.

However, salvation only occurs when we die.

That is, you are saved…when you die. 🤷
 
The Catholic teaching *Extra Ecclesiam Nulla Salus *has not changed. It has been the constant teaching of the Church; indeed, it is the teaching of Christ, for it claims nothing more than, and nothing less than, what Jesus claimed for Himself–that He is the Way, the Truth and the Life.

So to the degree that you reject His Church, is the degree that you reject Him.

However, how much of what you reject is a figment of your own imagination, is not for any of us to judge.
There are no degrees of rejection; you believe all of what He meant by what He stated or you don’t; there is no cafeteria Jesus. It is difficult to reject that which one is part of and reject that which has yet to be fully revealed according to Romans 8:19. I will state that I reject 95% of Catholic tradition; there are some things we agree on like the Trinity, the death of Jesus on the cross, the Virgin birth, where Jesus was born, and the resurrection.
 
If you cannot even answer where Scripture is in the Mass (see reference to your post below) you are most likely suffering from “invincible ignorance.”

Ignorance is a bummer, I might add. :sad_yes:
I’ll take a guess and say you would say it is part of the entire Mass; good guess or not? I do not recognize Mass as being Scriptural; otherwise I might be a Catholic.

.
Catholics have been saved, are being saved, and hope to be saved.
I’m sorry.
However, salvation only occurs when we die.
You just contradicted yourself; perhaps you meant fully redeemed when you die??
That is, you are saved…when you die. 🤷
Jesus did not come to save the righteous (which is what you are implicitly stating without realizing it) , but sinners (His own words), Few are saved when they die; the saved are saved before they die; otherwise no one is a Christian. 👍
 
There are no degrees of rejection;
Well, yes and no.

You are correct that, in the end, either you accept Him or you don’t.

But of course there are degrees of rejection! You’re doing it right now when you say (see below)…
I will state that I reject 95% of Catholic tradition; there are some things we agree on like the Trinity, the death of Jesus on the cross, the Virgin birth, where Jesus was born, and the resurrection.
How peculiar that you list the above things as Catholic tradition. :confused:

But here’s a biggie that you accept, that you know only because of the Catholic Church’s Sacred Tradition: the canon of Scripture. You would not know that Ephesians is inspired and the Gospel of Philip is not, were it not for the authority of the CC.

THAT is a big Tradition that you accept, Jenny. Without it, you might be quoting from the Book of Elchasi, thinking unwittingly that it’s* theopneustos.*.
 
I’ll take a guess and say you would say it is part of the entire Mass; good guess or not?
You are correct that it is part of the entire Mass (but using “a guess” to conclude this is still ignorance :D) Don’t know if you’ve ever been to a Mass or not, but I guarantee you that more Scripture is proclaimed at our one hour liturgy than at any Protestant service.
I do not recognize Mass as being Scriptural; otherwise I might be a Catholic.
Exactly.
You just contradicted yourself; perhaps you meant fully redeemed when you die??
It’s a matter of degree. Salvation is a process. We were saved once and for all, we are currently being saved, and we hope to be saved. But, in the end, salvation occurs when we die.

Perhaps I should have said, “You are saved, essentially, when you die.”
Jesus did not come to save the righteous (which is what you are implicitly stating without realizing it) ,
How so?
the saved are saved before they die; otherwise no one is a Christian. 👍
I don’t know any verses in Scripture that state a Christian is someone who is saved before he dies. This is a man-made tradition you’ve succumbed to, Jenny. You’ve heard it (perhaps from the mouth of a fallible pastor?) but you’ve not read it in a single page of Scripture.
 
I do not recognize Mass as being Scriptural; otherwise I might be a Catholic.
So you think hymns, prayers, Bible reading, homilies and Holy Communion are unscriptural. Of course, your church does exactly the same things every Sunday. So your church is unscriptural too?
 
Well, yes and no.

You are correct that, in the end, either you accept Him or you don’t.

But of course there are degrees of rejection! You’re doing it right now when you say (see below)…

How peculiar that you list the above things as Catholic tradition. :confused:

But here’s a biggie that you accept, that you know only because of the Catholic Church’s Sacred Tradition: the canon of Scripture. You would not know that Ephesians is inspired and the Gospel of Philip is not, were it not for the authority of the CC.

THAT is a big Tradition that you accept, Jenny. Without it, you might be quoting from the Book of Elchasi, thinking unwittingly that it’s* theopneustos.*.
Except I reject the authority of the magisterium and the Holy Spirit is the author of Scripture; not the Catholic church. The Council of Nicaea was an eastern meeting and not even in Rome and not an ecumenical council until part of it was declared by a Pope and/or Catholic church as ecumenical. Also, the letters of the writers were already in common use and all the council did was rule on what was already accepted as the Word of God by the churches already existing. So if you call that the Catholic church giving us the Bible; then I have no problem with disagreeing with that.
 
So you think hymns, prayers, Bible reading, homilies and Holy Communion are unscriptural. Of course, your church does exactly the same things every Sunday. So your church is unscriptural too?
Not to mention that everything from:

The grace of our Lord Jesus Christ and the love of God and the fellowship of the Holy Spirit be with you all. (2 Cor 13:13)

to

This is the Lamb of God who takes away the sins of the world. Happy are those who are called to his supper. (Rev. 19:9)

to

Lord I am not worthy to receive you, but only say the words and I shall be healed (Matt 8)

is straight from Scripture!
 
So if you call that the Catholic church giving us the Bible; then I have no problem with disagreeing with that.
Indeed, it was! It had Catholic bishops (does your church have bishops?) that celebrated the Liturgy, revered Mary, prayed to saints.

Not to mention that this canon–which you only affirm because of this authority that you ostensibly reject–was was ratified by the councils at Hippo (393), Carthage (397, 419), II Nicea (787), Florence (1442), and Trent (1546).

Thus, you not only submit to Tradition, but also agree that the CC has been given the charism of infallibility–on multiple occasions to boot! (Unless you believe that the CC made an error and that perhaps Revelation ought be omitted but the Didache admitted into the Bible?)
 
Oh come on ,lighten up .It is just that you have so much more to read from besides the bible (Church Fathers ,lenghty ,lengthy Catechisms) and there is only so much time.
 
Except I reject the authority of the magisterium and the Holy Spirit is the author of Scripture; not the Catholic church. The Council of Nicaea was an eastern meeting and not even in Rome and not an ecumenical council until part of it was declared by a Pope and/or Catholic church as ecumenical. Also, the letters of the writers were already in common use and all the council did was rule on what was already accepted as the Word of God by the churches already existing. So if you call that the Catholic church giving us the Bible; then I have no problem with disagreeing with that.
I know you have been banned, but I want to reply anyway.

When the bible was compiled there were MANY books written about Christ (The Gospels of Thomas and Mary come to mind immediately) that were in wide circulation and generally very highly regarded, yet those are not in the bible. The Apocalypse of John was NOT widely used and was held in very low regard by much of the Christian world, yet that was included. Each of those examples was performed through the authority of the Catholic Church to discern the truth of Christ, which was given them by Christ.

I disagree. I dont hear contempt but frustration. I am ok with frustration, its hard to argue against the truth, trust me, I tried. 👍
 
You are contemptable and an unregenerate and self serving person who is of your father, the devil, for he was a liar from the beginning and is full lies and deceit. You removed me for proselytizing who? I never did such a thing and you know it; your problem is you hate truth, God and love religion. I called it right; that you came into this thread for one reason and one reason only. When you could not find a legitimate reason you made one up; typical for an unregenerate soul. Flee from the wrath to come and turn to Jesus who can save you; repent and believe the gospel according to God; not Rome.Now to answer CatHerder in a charitable manner:
So you think hymns, prayers, Bible reading, homilies and Holy Communion are unscriptural. Of course, your church does exactly the same things every Sunday. So your church is unscriptural too?
No not all, if it accords with Scripture, then it is acceptable and if it is not, then it is not acceptable. The firm standard to which mens traditions are to be measured is the Scripture in my opinion; not the other way around as in your church. That is how the JW’s and Mormons and other religions emerged by using the tradition of men to interpret the Scripture as opposed to Scripture being used to measure the tradition of men. This is why Jesus was so angered by the Pharisees, Scribes and Sadducees. They took their traditions and nullified the Scripture and He said because of that they prevented people from entering the Kingdom.

1 The Pharisees and some of the scribes gathered around Him when they had come from 1 Jerusalem, 2 and had seen that some of His disciples were eating their bread with impure hands, that is, unwashed. 3 For the Pharisees and all the Jews do not eat unless they carefully wash their hands, thus observing the traditions of the elders; 4 and when they come from the market place, they do not eat unless they cleanse themselves; and there are many other things which they have received in order to observe, such as the washing of cups and pitchers and copper pots. 5 The Pharisees and the scribes asked Him, “Why do Your disciples not walk according to the tradition of the elders, but eat their bread with impure hands?” 6 And He said to them, "Rightly did Isaiah prophesy of you hypocrites, as it is written: THIS PEOPLE HONORS ME WITH THEIR LIPS, BUT THEIR HEART IS FAR AWAY FROM ME.7 BUT IN VAIN DO THEY WORSHIP ME, TEACHING AS DOCTRINES THE PRECEPTS OF MEN.’
8 “Neglecting the commandment of God, you hold to the tradition of men.” 9 He was also saying to them, "You are experts at setting aside the commandment of God in order to keep your tradition. - Mark 7:1-9

Jesus affirms the point I made & received from Him; that the tradition of men can and often does nullify God and prevent men from entering His kingdom. In matthew, Jesus again affirms the same.

1 Then some Pharisees and scribes came to Jesus from Jerusalem and said, 2 “Why do Your disciples break the tradition of the elders? For they do not wash their hands when they eat bread.” 3 And He answered and said to them, "Why do you yourselves transgress the commandment of God for the sake of your tradition? 4 "For God said, HONOR YOUR FATHER AND MOTHER,' and, HE WHO SPEAKS EVIL OF FATHER OR MOTHER IS TO BE PUT TO DEATH.’ 5 "But you say, Whoever says to his father or mother, "Whatever I have that would help you has been given to God," 6 he is not to honor his father or his mother.' 7 And by this you invalidated the word of God for the sake of your tradition. 7 "You hypocrites, rightly did Isaiah prophesy of you: 8 THIS PEOPLE HONORS ME WITH THEIR LIPS,
BUT THEIR HEART IS FAR AWAY FROM ME.
9 `BUT IN VAIN DO THEY WORSHIP ME,
TEACHING AS DOCTRINES THE PRECEPTS OF MEN.’ "
10 After Jesus called the crowd to Him, He said to them, "Hear and understand. 11 “It is not what enters into the mouth that defiles the man, but what proceeds out of the mouth, this defiles the man.”
12 Then the disciples came and said to Him, “Do You know that the Pharisees were offended when they heard this statement?” 13 But He answered and said, "Every plant which My heavenly Father did not plant shall be uprooted. 14 “Let them alone; they are blind guides of the blind. And if a blind man guides a blind man, both will fall into a pit.”

What I find frightening and worrisome are verses 13-14 because in essence Jesus is saying leave them alone; these are not whom the Father has given me and they are blind guides and leading the blind into the pit What caused this; they put their traditions that contradicted/nullified Scripture before and above Scripture.

You wonder why a true Protestant puts their trust in the Scripture above that of the tradition of men; for the reasons above and because Jesus also said it was because they were set above the Word of God. Traditions of men are not the Word of God and not all traditions nullify the Scripture either. The example you gave was the use of Hymns, which many are based on specific passages contained in God’s revealed word and complement what was already written. Jesus commanded us to learn from the mistakes that Israel made is to be used as examples and instruction.

Why do you think all false religions put forth extra biblical revelation, which is a guise for usurping the authority of God as revealed in His word for the tradition of men to gain control and power over people?
 
Oh come on ,lighten up .It is just that you have so much more to read from besides the bible (Church Fathers ,lenghty ,lengthy Catechisms) and there is only so much time.
This is like a high school student telling a Mathematics professor that it’s better that he has a high schooler’s workload. The Math professor has to understand calculus and trigonometry and differential equations and linear algebra etc etc etc. It’s just good ole 2+2 for me and I’m good.

(Note: this analogy ought not be made to be more than what is stated. I am not making any reference to david’s theological understanding as being that of a high schooler. The analogy lies only here: saying that one has “lots to read” as compared to just one thing is equivalent to having an elementary-level understanding of math.)
 
Sorry .it may have been snooty .However ,we did discuss this at break with workers ,and their is some truth to my point .Many courses in our U.S.Constitution study the document a little ,but many study more 200 years of rulings.Others study the document at length.You have to admit ,protestants have less tradition, and less sacraments , less rules ,therefore less cathechism , less history per say ,and hence can concentrate more on the major document-Holy Scripture.The allegation of Catholics not being bible readers or keeping it from laity is a serious topic,of which I have been fair in the past ,and is not the topic here .Sorry again for being flippant .
 
This is like a high school student telling a Mathematics professor that it’s better that he has a high schooler’s workload. The Math professor has to understand calculus and trigonometry and differential equations and linear algebra etc etc etc. It’s just good ole 2+2 for me and I’m good.

(Note: this analogy ought not be made to be more than what is stated. I am not making any reference to david’s theological understanding as being that of a high schooler. The analogy lies only here: saying that one has “lots to read” as compared to just one thing is equivalent to having an elementary-level understanding of math.)
Howdy,Glad for your "note ‘,not that you were referencing my level but it helped clarify your statement.True but I would say the bible is “full of treasures” that just for it to be elementary is a feat .A little less related but still offering perspective is that F.B.I.agents who go on the counterfeit detail/squad do not look at phony bills much.They study and handle ,analyze real money ,over and over again ,day in and day out .They get so good that you give em a stack of bills with a phony inserted somewhere and it sticks out like a sore thumb when they come to it. Perhaps ,if protestants have “less” to study,but know it so well, they are hyper-sensitive to dogma that indeed might be extra-biblical or traditional if it does not totally “fit” their biblical understanding…P.S. I like reading early church fathers -have Augustines’ “Confessions”.I like sites where you can find them -indeed we have a plethara of writings at our fingertip
 
Perhaps ,if protestants have “less” to study,but know it so well, they are hyper-sensitive to dogma that indeed might be extra-biblical or traditional that may not totally “fit” biblically.
Perhaps. 🤷

But it seems curious that all of these Protestants that have just one thing to “study” cannot even agree on what’s dogma, what’s extra biblical, what’s tradition.

Here’s just a few concepts that have differing–and often contradictory–doctrines, all from reading the same Scriptures (well, give or take 7 books ) This unholy Trinity of me, the Bible and the Holy Spirit has produced chaos and confusion on all of these concepts:
• Abortion
• Attend weekly services, don’t have to go to Church
• Baptism–is it by sprinkling or immersion? Infant or adult? Sacrament or ordinance?
• Charity or no charity (help one another or let them help
• Church leadership, or no leadership
• Death/Soul Sleep
• Divorce
• Drinking allowed, drinking not allowed
• Head coverings or no head coverings
• Health and wealth gospel
• Hell, or no hell
• Homosexuality
• Is God‘s Holy Name Jehovah
• Judge others, don’t judge others
• Lord’s day on Saturday or Sunday
• Music or no music (Singing or no singing)
• Once saved, always saved
• Ordination
• Predestination
• Rapture
• Sola scriptura/private interpretation
• The Eucharist (Communion)
• Tongues (some believe others are not saved if they don’t speak in tongues)
• Trinity vs. Unitarianism
• What’s a sin, what is not a sin
• When to celebrate the Lord’s Day
• Women pastors, no women pastors
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top