Do you have questions about Catholic beliefs & Practices

[PJM]

Here’s the balance:thumbsup:

Whether it is in the Bible or not, the sending of the apostles to forgive sins after breathing on them the Holy Spirit clearly indicated what they were going to do, that was, forgave sins. I cannot imagine that they were not doing it after Jesus clearly sent them to do so (As the Father has sent me, even so I send you)[/QUTE]

REPLY bh

Absolutely. And we know absolutely that they then went out after Pentecost in the Power of the Holy Ghost , and the Holy Ghost (who convicts of sin, judgement and righteousness) thru Peter’s words and consequent faith, repentance and baptism reconciled 3000 souls to God, complete with sin forgiveness. The gospel was preached, and folks got faith, repentance, and baptism with assurance of sin forgiveness, not by confessional or sacrament , but by authoritative ,Holy Spirit piercing declaration. We know this explicitly. What I am asking is where do we see repeated examples of such explicitness that we find in this type of forgiveness, to a post baptismal, sacramental sin forgiveness or retention ?(Again, only James and your John quote come close but still not explicit.) Can it be shown as explicitly that it is post baptismal, and that only the apostles /priests can do this, and not ‘one to another’ ?

[PJM]WON a new and very good point

Here again is evidence of what GOD can choose to do. Throughout the NT it was GOD who forgave sins directly and exclusively. As a FYI; todays RCC does also have CONDITIONALLY a “General Confession” that God too accepts. BUT it is highly conditionally. NOW at least I’m beginning to see your argument. It’s STILL not “THEE” truth; but still enlightening.

NEVER-EVER can any true teaching make void or override another. The case you mention is and WAS an exception to Christ NORM for sin-forgiveness.

]QUOTE]Well, it does not make sense. The Church just began and it would not stop there. We know that there were successors to the apostles by the laying of hands

REPLY bh [May be in 2 post because of length?]

Yes, but can you show me where early church, during the apostles lifetime and shortly thereafter, thru their successors, practiced/taught such sacramental, exclusively priestly, confessions ?

SURE, it’s right next to the part that say’s God is “OK” with Protestants having thousands of differing faith beliefs; most of which compete directly with the Bible and what Jesus empowered [Mt 28:18] directly and here it is again; EXCLUSIVELY His CC to teach without even a possibility of ERROR when teaching of required Faith beliefs and or Morals. [Mt. 16:18-19; John 17: 17-20 & Mt 28:19-20]. All of which have been shared before; and apparently rejected; or at least not comprehended by you dear friend.

Continued Blessings

 

[PJM]

I guess I should have more precise. People (humans) who believe (have faith in) God and His Word are declared righteous by God. Is that better?

OK:shrug:

So what my friend is your understanding of “God and His Word”/

I’m not trying to be difficult; but we don’t agree and I’m trying to understand exactly where and WHY that is

God Bless you
Patrick

 

[In_His_Grace]

Demons also believe. Are they imputed with righteousness?

 

[In_His_Grace]

OK:shrug:

So what my friend is your understanding of “God and His Word”/

I’m not trying to be difficult; but we don’t agree and I’m trying to understand exactly where and WHY that is

God Bless you
Patrick

Sorry PJM, the Latin fathers looked to the Latin, the Vulgate, to formulate their doctrine of justification. Martin Luther looked to the original Greek of the New Testament to formulate the true doctrine of justification. Imputed righteousness, not infused righteousness. Do your homework my friend.

 

[Michael68]

Sorry PJM, the Latin fathers looked to the Latin, the Vulgate, to formulate their doctrine of justification. Martin Luther looked to the original Greek of the New Testament to formulate the true doctrine of justification. Imputed righteousness, not infused righteousness. Do your homework my friend.

How do you know this is the “true doctrine”? Just because Luther said it?

 

[In_His_Grace]

How do you know this is the “true doctrine”? Just because Luther said it?

Do your homework.

 

[Michael68]

Do your homework.

Sorry, i don’t subscribe to Luther’s fallible interpretation.

 

[In_His_Grace]

Sorry, i don’t subscribe to Luther’s fallible interpretation.

Who’s interpretation do you subscribe to? Your faith beliefs as a Catholic are based on your fallible interpretation of scripture and history no? No one, you, me, or anyone has God all figured out. When we see the face of God we will understand, until then all I can say is…

Oh, the depth of the riches of the wisdom and knowledge of God!
How unsearchable his judgments,
and his paths beyond tracing out!
“Who has known the mind of the Lord?
Or who has been his counselor?”
“Who has ever given to God,
that God should repay them?”For from him and through him and for him are all things.
To him be the glory forever! Amen. (Romans 11:33-36)

Amen!

The Catholic Church does not have the Creator of the universe, our Lord and Savior, all figured out, wrapped up nice and tidy in a box.

pax

 

[pablope]

Who’s interpretation do you subscribe to? Your faith beliefs as a Catholic are based on your fallible interpretation of scripture and history no? No one, you, me, or anyone has God all figured out. When we see the face of God we will understand, until then all I can say is…

Oh, the depth of the riches of the wisdom and knowledge of God!
How unsearchable his judgments,
and his paths beyond tracing out!
“Who has known the mind of the Lord?
Or who has been his counselor?”
“Who has ever given to God,
that God should repay them?”For from him and through him and for him are all things.
To him be the glory forever! Amen. (Romans 11:33-36)

Amen!

The Catholic Church does not have the Creator of the universe, our Lord and Savior, all figured out, wrapped up nice and tidy in a box.

pax

You did not answer…but sidestepped it.

So let me reask…is Luther’s the correct one or not? Is there error in Luther’s doctrine or not?

 

[pablope]

Sorry PJM, the Latin fathers looked to the Latin, the Vulgate, to formulate their doctrine of justification. Martin Luther looked to the original Greek of the New Testament to formulate the true doctrine of justification. Imputed righteousness, not infused righteousness. Do your homework my friend.

So…you are saying, by going to the Greek…Luther was able to figure out correctly the doctrine…all by himself?

So Augustine got it wrong, and Luther got it right?

 

[In_His_Grace]

You did not answer…but sidestepped it.

So let me reask…is Luther’s the correct one or not? Is there error in Luther’s doctrine or not?

Luther was correct regarding justification.

 

[In_His_Grace]

So…you are saying, by going to the Greek…Luther was able to figure out correctly the doctrine…all by himself?

So Augustine got it wrong, and Luther got it right?

Would you be so kind as to show me Augustine’s understanding of the doctrine of justification? Sources please.

 

[Michael68]

Would you be so kind as to show me Augustine’s understanding of the doctrine of justification? Sources please.

Look into St. Augustine’s writings and “do your homework”.

 

[In_His_Grace]

Look into St. Augustine’s writings and “do your homework”.

ditto

 

[In_His_Grace]

Look into St. Augustine’s writings and “do your homework”.

God is so good is He not?

“Late have I loved you, O Beauty ever ancient, ever new, late have I loved you! You were within me, but I was outside, and it was there that I searched for you. In my unloveliness I plunged into the lovely things which you created. You were with me, but I was not with you. Created things kept me from you; yet if they had not been in you they would not have been at all. You called, you shouted, and you broke through my deafness. You flashed, you shone, and you dispelled my blindness. You breathed your fragrance on me; I drew in breath and now I pant for you. I have tasted you, now I hunger and thirst for more. You touched me, and I burned for your peace.” (Augustine, The Confessions - My God how I love this book)

 

[pablope]

Luther was correct regarding justification.

How did you come to this conclusion? What is your basis?

So in effect, you are saying Luther’s doctrine is error free?

 

[Reuben_J]

The Catholic Church does not have the Creator of the universe, our Lord and Savior, all figured out, wrapped up nice and tidy in a box.

pax

I know you are responding to a poster who does not think Luther was right. So this is a fair reply.

Catholic response to this would be in the line … so neither was Luther! (as far as the complete knowledge of the Lord God almighty is concerned. We only know what is revealed to us).

That being so, Luther came in and introduced another theology 1500 years after the Catholic Church existed which meant to say the Church got it all wrong in that 1500 years.

Now, I heard some claim that indeed the Catholic Church was right but gone bad during the time of Luther, who therefore had to correct her. Not sure whether this is the official line but there is indeed an impression that this may be one of such thinking to justify the action of Luther. That the Church Jesus set up was okay but later deviated and thus Luther merely did the necessity to make it right again. In order to do that he had to leave the Church since the Church then did not listen to him.

No Catholic would accept that line of argument because it causes the fragmenting of the Church every time someone disagrees.

I would suppose both Luther and Catholic Church cannot make the claim about who have it right, that in cognizance of respect for each other. Perhaps the most we can say, the Catholic Church had been there earlier than you all, and if she was wrong, then all the 1500 years of existence was thrown into the drain until Fr. Luther came.

Peace

 

[PJM]

There are sins which are ‘retained’. One example that I could think of is sin of unapproved divorce, which can only be righted by reconciling with the former spouse or to get that marriage formally annulled. This is a good example where the Church/priests have the power to retain and forgive sin (as person in Christ).

It could include a number of possibilities:

A BAD habit w/o a sincere effort to correct it on a number of specific issues such as pornography; drug use; alcoholism come quickly to mind.

It might be an obstinate refusal to ACCEPT and implement Church Moral teachings such as to stop the use of contraceptive sex. Or to honor Holy Day’s of obligation; or to stop a adulterous affair.

There are many possible acts and situations based on NOT having TRUE-Sincere Contrition; evidence not by words BUT by ones actual actions or at least attempted actions…

 

[PJM]

“Furthermore, it is taught that we cannot obtain forgiveness of sin and righteousness before God through our merit, work, or satisfactions, but that we receive forgiveness of sin and become righteous before God out of grace for Christ’s sake through faith when we believe that Christ has suffered for us and that for his sake our sin is forgiven and righteousness and eternal life are given to us. For God will regard and reckon this faith as righteousness in his sight, as St. Paul says in Romans 3:21-26] and 4:5]” (Book of Concord, 38:1-40:3).

No my friend; THAT is what YOU have been taught. It is NOT what Christ Himself taught; commanded or desired:shrug:.

And I do know and understand you’re beliefs. So lets take this in steps. These are the first 2 points I wish to share with you.

2Peter 1: 19-21
And we have the more firm prophetical word: whereunto you do well to attend, as to a light that shineth in a dark place, until the day dawn, and the day star arise in your hearts: [20] Understanding this first, that no prophecy of scripture is made by private interpretation. [21] For prophecy came not by the will of man at any time: but the holy men of God spoke, inspired by the Holy Ghost.
[Douay explanation]

[20] No prophecy of scripture is made by private interpretation: This shews plainly that the scriptures are not to be expounded by any one’s private judgment or private spirit, because every part of the holy scriptures were written by men inspired by the Holy Ghost, and declared as such by the Church; therefore they are not to be interpreted but by the Spirit of God, which he hath left, and promised to remain with his Church to guide her in all truth to the end of the world. Some may tell us, that many of our divines interpret the scriptures: they may do so, but they do it always with a submission to the judgment of the Church, and not otherwise. End Quotes

My friend have you ever been exposed to the One Infallible Rule for right understanding of the Bible? Which BTW is a Catholic Book.

Never Ever; can, may or DOES
One verse, passage or teaching have the power or authority to
Invalidate, make void or override another
Verse, passage or teaching:

**Were this even the slightest possibility;[it’s NOT!] it would render the entire Bible useless to teach or lean Christ Faith” **

Thanks for posting and please KEEP asking questions:thumbsup:

God Bless you,

Patrick

 

[PJM]

Originally Posted by blanchardman View Post
I guess I should have more precise. People (humans) who believe (have faith in) God and His Word are declared righteous by God. Is that better?[/QUOOTE]

benhurs reply

I understand you .There is a faith that is genuine, is of God, and righteousness is imputed. That there are false faiths or faiths that fall short does not change the ‘real mccoy’

WHICH IS WHY:shrug: There are thousands of differing sets of Protestant belief?.

Somehow Job was perfect , and Enoch and Elijah enough to be taken up etc., etc.If not imputed, then what , worked at, or not on this side of life, or is it really that it is both imputed and worked out perfectly (Mary) ? Then why both for Mary but maybe not Job or Elijah etc. ? Blessings