Father Corapi ... on Baptism & Protestants

  • Thread starter Thread starter BRB1
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
Why would anyone need to confess their sins to a priest.
I contend the story in Acts 19 strongly suggests just this.

Acts 19:9-18 …here’s how it goes:

Paul and 12 disciples (on whom he gave the Spirit by laying his hands on them (v. 6)) were preaching in a certain building called the “hall of Tyrannus” (v. 9). That’s where they preached for 2 years (v. 10). (incidentally, v. 11-12 is an example of relics in Scripture ;)) Signs were performed (v. 11-17) that revealed Christ. This became known to “residents of Ephesus” (v. 17). Then it says many of these new believers “now came” to confess their sins (v. 18). Presumably they “came” to the “hall of Tyrannus” were Paul and his ordained disciples were. But what is important is that these new believers didn’t just confess their sins where they were, straight to God.

Coupled with the authority Christ gave to the apostles in the bullet-points above, this is a very strong case that the sinners came to confess to ordained ministers.
 
Why would anyone need to confess their sins to a priest.
Another way to analyze Acts 19 in my previous post:

Where did the Ephesians go then to confess? According to the text in Acts 19 they left their locality for another for this purpose.
  • We are told the setting for the passage was the hall of Tyrannus. Then when we are told they “came and confessed.” (the Greek for “came” there is ercomai, which means *“to come from one place to another, and used both of persons arriving and of those returning” *
  • We are specifically told Paul and his ministers, ordained by his hands, were there at the hall.
  • Therefore, it is likely that the confessions were made to them, or they wouldn’t need to leave one place to go to another to confess their sins! Especially when Jesus told His ordained disciples that whomever’s sins they forgave would be forgiven!
 
brothers and siters have you read this?

ewtn.com/vnews/getstory.asp?number=93962

the Lord has heard the prayers of His people and changes are on the way…
OMG this is just WONDERFUL! I so hope that The Church can move out fast and get back to the TRUE Spirit of Vatican II and reinstall the solemnity and high reverence in the mass and push aside the secularized influences that we picked up from the radical period of the 60’s to current times.

Great news. This suggests to me that the period of time that Satan asked to test The Church is over and The Catholic Church is still standing and while we took some hull damage we are still strongly afloat and we are moving on to a new era.

Bold new times ahead and I expect a purging of false Catholics from our ranks and greater purity and public excommunications of public officials who are paying lip service to the Church in exchange for political power and gain. We will also face more persecution - but I’d rather have the persecution than the spiritual mediocrity that was trying to take over our beloved Church.

James
 
OMG this is just WONDERFUL! I so hope that The Church can move out fast and get back to the TRUE Spirit of Vatican II and reinstall the solemnity and high reverence in the mass and push aside the secularized influences that we picked up from the radical period of time.

Great news. This suggests to me that the period of time that Satan asked to test The Church is over and The Catholic Church is still standing and while we took some hull damage we are still strongly afloat and we are moving on to a new era.

Bold new times ahead and I expect a purging of false Catholics from our ranks and greater purity and public excommunications of public officials who are paying lip service to the Church in exchange for political power and gain. We will also face more persecution - but I’d rather have the persecution that the spiritual mediocrity that is trying to take over our beloved Church.

James
And so be it…

let’s give thanks to our God. Blessed be His Holy Name, Jesus.
 
What you don’t know the definition of restitution??? I am sorry :crying: I know what the Church teaches us and I won’t back down.
Thats between you and the Lord. One thing I do not do is add or take away from God’s Word. I am not going by what the church says but the Word of God.🙂
 
the NKJV on confessing sins

then he shall confess the sin which he has committed. He shall make restitution for his trespass in full, plus one-fifth of it, and give it to the one he has wronged.But if the man has no relative to whom restitution may be made for the wrong, the restitution for the wrong must go to the LORD for the priest, in addition to the ram of the atonement with which atonement is made for him.Every offering of all the holy things of the children of Israel, which they bring to the priest, shall be his.And every man’s holy things shall be his; whatever any man gives the priest shall be his."’

But obviously you refuse to read the other post that someone else made about confessing sins to one another

Commentary on Numbers 5:7-10 from the Haydock Bible Commentary

Ver. 7. Shall confess. This confession and satisfaction, ordained in the old law, was a figure of the sacrament of penance. (Challoner) — A special confession of their sin, with satisfaction, and a sacrifice, are required. So Christ orders us to lay open our consciences to his priests, St. John. xx., &c. (Worthington)

Ver. 8. But if. Moses does not mention this case, Leviticus vi. 2, 5. Here he determines that the heirs, if known, must be entitled to the restitution. A Hebrew could not die without an heir; but a proselyte might, and then restitution was to be made to God. The Rabbins say, that when the person injured was already dead, the offender took 10 persons with him to the grave of the deceased, and said, “I have sinned against the Lord and against. N.; I have injured him thus.” After which he gave what was due to his heirs; or, if none could be found, to the house of judgment or the judges, who might restore it, if any claimant appeared afterwards.

Ver. 9. First-fruits; (teruman,) a term which comprises also voluntary oblations of all sorts, and the parts of the victims which belong to the priests; unless the person offering expressed a different intention. (Calmet)

Point, set, match
I stand on the Word of God and nowhere in this passage do I read that you are to confess your sin to a priest. Maybe you missed it but this passage is talking about restitution and confession between two individuals.
John MacArthur Study Bible
Matthew Henry’s commentary
J.Vernon McGee commentary:D
 
I addressed this for you already in post #21, bold emphasis added:
Greek scholar Dr. Julius R. Mantey explains this verse the same way I addressed it before.
Another Greek scholar Dr. Kenneth Wuest translates it “they have been previously forgiven them”
Who had they confessed their sins to?? God
 
So am I to conclude that God explicitly meant to exclude priest, deacons and bishops from among His saints? When James is speaking of "confessing our sins to “one another” that any priest should be avoided since a priest can not be a saint? 🤷 😊

[Sign]Please…
:rotfl:[/SIGN]

James
No need to confess your sins to a priest. 😉
 
No need to confess your sins to a priest. 😉
That is your interpretation but the bible does not say do not confess your sins to a priest now does it? Why don’t you just admit that James’ verse you quote makes “priests and bishops” inclusive of the group in the expression “confess one to another”?

Now, tell me where the assembly of Christians is? Do you imagine it just might be where ever the priest and bishop happens to be? 😉

You really should familiarize yourself with what the early Christians actually did by looking at the patristic histories and writings. Christians have always confessed their sins. Why is it that most Protestants seem to think they have a special dispensation from God to not confess their sins? Do Protestants believe that Jesus gave a useless authority to the apostles when he gave the authority to forgive sins in his name under the loosing and binding authority? Does Jesus give useless gifts?
Early Church Father Teaching on Confession:
“In church confess your sins, and do not come to your prayer with a guilt conscience. Such is the Way of Life…On the Lord’s own day, assemble in common to break bread and offer thanks; but first confess your sins, so that your sacrifice may be pure." Didache, 4:14,14:1 (c. A.D. 90).

“Moreover, it is in accordance with reason that we should return to soberness[of conduct], and, while yet we have opportunity, exercise repentance towards God. **It is well to reverence both God and the bishop.” **Ignatius, Epistle to the Smyraeans, 9 (c. A.D. 110).

"Moreover, that this Marcus compounds philters and love-potions, in order to insult the persons of some of these women, if not of all, those of them who have returned to the Church of God–a thing which frequently occurs–have acknowledged, confessing, too, that they have been defiled by him, and that they were filled with a burning passion towards him. A sad example of this occurred in the case of a certain Asiatic, one of our deacons, who had received him (Marcus) into his house. His wife, a woman of remarkable beauty, fell a victim both in mind and body to this magician, and, for a long time, travelled about with him. At last, when, with no small difficulty, the brethren had converted her, she spent her whole time in the exercise of public confession, weeping over and lamenting the defilement which she had received from this magician." Irenaeus, Against Heresies, 1:13 (A.D. 180).

“…Some of them [women], indeed, make a public confession of their sins; but others of them are ashamed to do this, and in a tacit kind of way, despairing of [attaining to] the life of God, have, some of them, apostatized altogether; while others hesitate between the two courses, and incur that which is implied in the proverb, ‘neither without nor within;’ possessing this as the fruit from the seed of the children of knowledge.” Irenaeus, Against Heresies, 1:13 (A.D. 180).

“Father who knowest the hearts of all grant upon this Thy servant whom Thou hast chosen for the episcopate to feed Thy holy flock and serve as Thine high priest, that he may minister blamelessly by night and day, that he may unceasingly behold and appropriate Thy countenance and offer to Thee the gifts of Thy holy Church. **And that by the high priestly Spirit he may have authority to forgive sins…” **Hippolytus, Apostolic Tradition, 3 (A.D. 215).

“The Pontifex Maximus–that is, the bishop of bishops–issues an edict: 'I remit, to such as have discharged (the requirements of) repentance, the sins both of adultery and of fornication.’” Tertullian, Modesty, 1 (A.D. 220).

“In addition to these there is also a seventh, albeit hard and laborious: the remission of sins through penance…when he does not shrink from declaring his sin to a priest of the Lord.” Origen, Homilies on Leviticus, 2:4 (A.D. 248).

“For although in smaller sins sinners may do penance for a set time, and according to the rules of discipline come to public confession, and by imposition of the hand of the bishop and clergy receive the right of communion: now with their time still unfulfilled, while persecution is still raging, while the peace of the Church itself is not vet restored, they are admitted to communion, and their name is presented; and while the penitence is not yet performed, confession is not yet made, the hands Of the bishop and clergy are not yet laid upon them, the eucharist is given to them; although it is written, 'Whosoever shall eat the bread and drink the cup of the Lord unworthily, shall be guilty of the body and blood of the Lord.’” Cyprian, To the Clergy, 9 (16):2 (A.D. 250).

“Moreover, how much are they both greater in faith and better in their fear, who, although bound by no crime of sacrifice to idols or of certificate, yet, since they have even thought of such things, with grief and simplicity confess this very thing to God’s priests, and make the conscientious avowal, put off from them the load of their minds, and seek out the salutary medicine even for slight and moderate wounds, knowing that it is written, ‘God is not mocked.’ God cannot be mocked, nor deceived, nor deluded by any deceptive cunning. **Yea, he sins the more, who, thinking that God is like man, believes that he evades the penalty of his crime if he has not openly admitted his crime…I entreat you, beloved brethren, that each one should confess his own sin, while he who has sinned is still in this world, while his confession may be received, while the satisfaction and remission made by the priests are pleasing to the Lord?” **Cyprian, To the Lapsed, 28-29 (A.D. 251).

“**It is necessary to confess our sins to those whom the dispensation of God’s mysteries is entrusted.” **Basil, Rule Briefly Treated, 288 (A.D. 374).
James
 
SteveGC said:
Hear, hear.

And I’m sitting here wondering if Seeking would still use this immature method of debate if he realized that the longer he stays here and does so, the more entrenched Catholics become in their faith. In some ways I hope he stays and rants on with his nonsense…indeed it emboldens me in our Church, having the absolute opposite effect Seeking wishes his efforts to have. Oh, the irony.
In this time of Lent, perhaps Seeking12 has been given to us as a hair shirt.
 
SteveGC said:
Hear, hear.

And I’m sitting here wondering if Seeking would still use this immature method of debate if he realized that the longer he stays here and does so, the more entrenched Catholics become in their faith. In some ways I hope he stays and rants on with his nonsense…indeed it emboldens me in our Church, having the absolute opposite effect Seeking wishes his efforts to have. Oh, the irony.
It is best if we focus on dealing with his arguments and not on him personally.

He has so far shown error in several of his posts, especially in his denial that God has called all men to salvation, which is plainly stated in the New Testament.
1st Timothy 2: 1 I desire therefore, first of all, that supplications, prayers, intercessions, and thanksgivings be made for all men: 2 For kings, and for all that are in high station: that we may lead a quiet and a peaceable life in all piety and chastity. 3 For this is good and acceptable in the sight of God our Saviour, 4 Who will have all men to be saved, and to come to the knowledge of the truth. 5 For there is one God, and one mediator of God and men, the man Christ Jesus: 6 Who gave himself a redemption for all, a testimony in due times.

A great many n-Cs like to quote to us verse 5 above, but look at the context of what S12 contradicts. :eek:
 
40.png
guanophore:
No, Seeking, you are wrong. The rewards from doing good works are very much part of the Apostolic gospel.
2 John 8-10
8 Look to yourselves, that you may not lose what you have worked for, but may win a full reward. 9 Any one who goes ahead and does not abide in the doctrine of Christ does not have God; he who abides in the doctrine has both the Father and the Son.

What do you suppose the Apostle is speaking about working “for”?
It is you that are wrong and are teaching others a different gospel than the Lord gave and you are adding wrath upon wrath.
And you evaluate this how? By your understanding of the Scripture? Who is to say that your understanding of what is written is any more accurate than mine?

If I believe the Apostle meant what he said, and that we can work, and get a “full reward”, how is it that your denial has any more validity?
If the Sacraments produce grace
I do not think this is defensible. I could be wrong, but it seems to me that Grace comes from God. His grace flows through the sacraments because He has ordained that it should happen. I don’t think that they, of themselves “produce” grace.
and you must do the sacraments in order to receive additional grace,
I am not sure if it is told to you more times you will be able to accept that sacraments are a gift from God, a channel through which His grace flows. Your notion that one “must do” them is erroneous. It is more a case of one being privileged to do them. We “get” to do them! Like the man whose eyes Jesus pasted mud “got” to wash in the pool and be healed. Did he “have to”? no, I think not. If he had disobeyed the Lord, and not washed, would he have gained healing? I think not…
then you are producing your own works in order to gain more grace.
such a statement reflects a lack of understanding about receiving grace.

Did the blind man “produce his own works” by washing in the pool after the Lord put mud on his eyes? did he “work” to gain healing?
Grace is not a partial thing; it is a gift (100%); are you receiving your gift in pieces based on what you perform…come on;
Indeed grace is a gift. About the partial, I think this is easily disputed. Many people have partial revelation, and some grace, but need more. Scripture is clear that “to those that have, more will be given”.
anyone can see that is a works salvation; are you so blind that you cannot see?
We have the mind of Christ. We look at the role of works in salvation according to the apostolic Teaching. Most of our Protestant brethren are separated from this, since their spiritual ancestors departed from the Succession.

however, I do understand how it seems that way to you, since you have a distorted and non-apostolic understanding of sacraments.
"guanophore:
You are also wrong about sacraments. They are a channel through which grace flows, not separate from grace. To those who have, more is given. A person who is open to grace will get more grace. None of these truths detract from grace. You have misunderstood the statement of Trent, and of Vatican II.
Explain the error.
I am doing my best. :o

I think if you can understand about the mud and the washing, it will make more sense.
Further more, Catholic teaching has changed saying “separated brethren” as opposed to saying those outside of Catholicism are damned.
Yes. What is your point?
They are speaking out of both sides of their mouth and you know it; you will admit that among your Catholic buddies, but not before a Protestant. You also speak on both sides.
No, Seeking, this is not the case. The church has always, and still does, teach that there is no salvation outside the Church.
If Vat II verifies the Council of Trent; the only way someone would not be damned outside the Church is if they are ignorant of Catholic teaching and put their faith in Christ.
Don’t you think this is the case for most Protesants? Surely your statements in this thread have demonstrated this it true!
 
Jn 20:22-23 is not to be interpreted to mean that Jesus gave to a select body of people the right to forgive sins and let people into heaven. The correct understanding from the Greek text should be translated as “Whosoever sins you remit (forgive) shall have already been forgiven them, and whosoever sins you retain (do not forgive) shall have already not been forgiven them.” The disciples dor any one else do not forgive sins. They proclaimed forgiveness on the basis of the message of the Gospel. Mark 2:7 “Who can forgive sins but God only.” This passage does not say we need to go to a priest because the sinner who repents to God has already been forgiven.
Eph 2:8 is pretty clear when it says “For by grace you have been saved through Faith, and that not of yourselves; it is the gift of God not of works lest anyone should boast.”
As for James 2:24 You need to go back a few verses where the Word of God speaks of Abraham’s faith. By faith (He was already justified by faith) he was justified before God and his righteousness declared; by works he was justified before men and his righteousness demonstrated. Warren Wiersbe puts it this way “Dynamic faith obeys God and proves itself in daily life and works.” Again you are saved by faith; works complements your faith.
Well, not being the Greek expert you seem to be I checked out the Blue Letter Bible site, a Protestant site by the way, and they disagree with you about your translation of John 20:22-23. I also checked out a few different Bible translation, including the Protestant ESV which I’m really getting to like, and those scholars say you are wrong. Gee, who should I believe? Sorry, you lose.

You aer right in saying that only God can forgive sins. Had you read my comments a bit more closely you would have seen that this is exactly what I said. It is God forgiving the sins in the confessional, the priest is only pronouncing what God has done.

Yes, Eph 2:8 does say we are saved by faith but it does not say that we are saved by faith alone. There is a difference and you would know that if you continued reading as far as Eph 2:10.

I’ve heard that nonsense about being justified before men in James 2 but the problem is that there is nothing in the text that mentions being justified by men. It’s something that was made up to avoid the very clear implications of James 2:24 on Protestant theology. Why should we even be concerned about being justified before men?

Wiersbe is close but not quite right. Works do more than compliment our faith. Works are necessary for salvation but the works I am talking about are not works that we do - in other words, it is impossible to do anything toward earning our own salvation - but they are God working through us by the Holy Spirit. These are the works mentioned in Eph 2:10 and without them we cannot be saved. We do not have true saving faith unless the works, God’s works, are also present. Therefore we are not saved by faith alone nor does the Bible ever say we are.

Gary
 
That is your interpretation but the bible does not say do not confess your sins to a priest now does it? Why don’t you just admit that James’ verse you quote makes “priests and bishops” inclusive of the group in the expression “confess one to another”?

Now, tell me where the assembly of Christians is? Do you imagine it just might be where ever the priest and bishop happens to be? 😉

You really should familiarize yourself with what the early Christians actually did by looking at the patristic histories and writings. Christians have always confessed their sins. Why is it that most Protestants seem to think they have a special dispensation from God to not confess their sins? Do Protestants believe that Jesus gave a useless authority to the apostles when he gave the authority to forgive sins in his name under the loosing and binding authority? Does Jesus give useless gifts?

James
Please give scriptures from the NT to back what you are saying. The Bible is not hard to understand. It is so easy my friend to use a scripture or passage to go with your thinking. I am not saying I am perfect but cmon and really try to understand the whole context of God’s Word.
 
Try Warren Wiersbe Commentaries and the one you missed is the John MacArthur study Bible
God Bless:wave:
Well, I’m here to learn. Do you have a link to this Wiersbe exegesis? Because I’m up to at least 16 Bible translations that still don’t say “already been” in John 20:23.

I’m curious to hear the Wiersbe analysis of Acts 19 that I posted too.

MacArthur is not a Greek scholar. And his opinion should carry limited weight to anyone… :rolleyes:
 
Well, not being the Greek expert you seem to be I checked out the Blue Letter Bible site, a Protestant site by the way, and they disagree with you about your translation of John 20:22-23. I also checked out a few different Bible translation, including the Protestant ESV which I’m really getting to like, and those scholars say you are wrong. Gee, who should I believe? Sorry, you lose.

You aer right in saying that only God can forgive sins. Had you read my comments a bit more closely you would have seen that this is exactly what I said. It is God forgiving the sins in the confessional, the priest is only pronouncing what God has done.

Yes, Eph 2:8 does say we are saved by faith but it does not say that we are saved by faith alone. There is a difference and you would know that if you continued reading as far as Eph 2:10.

I’ve heard that nonsense about being justified before men in James 2 but the problem is that there is nothing in the text that mentions being justified by men. It’s something that was made up to avoid the very clear implications of James 2:24 on Protestant theology. Why should we even be concerned about being justified before men?

Wiersbe is close but not quite right. Works do more than compliment our faith. Works are necessary for salvation but the works I am talking about are not works that we do - in other words, it is impossible to do anything toward earning our own salvation - but they are God working through us by the Holy Spirit. These are the works mentioned in Eph 2:10 and without them we cannot be saved. We do not have true saving faith unless the works, God’s works, are also present. Therefore we are not saved by faith alone nor does the Bible ever say we are.

Gary
I stand by what the Greek Scholars Dr. Julius R. Mantey and Dr. Kenneth Wuest interpret this passage to be. Also try the John MacArthur study bible it should help you better understand this passage. I tell you what i who much rather quote Warren Wiersbe than someone who is still receiving milk instead of the meat of God’s Word. You might try reading the scriptures a little more slowly so you can better understand God’s Word. What bible did you say you are reading because the NKJV that i read doesn’t say without works we cannot be saved. Eph 2:10 “Good works cannot produce salvation but are subsequent and resultant God empowered fruits and evidences of it.” John MacArthur.
God Bless:D
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top