Father Corapi ... on Baptism & Protestants

[ppasa316]

No, you are very wrong about scripture being easy and your invalid neo-Christian interpretation of scripture just proves it in spades. Without proper authorized apostolic teaching we get the many errors of Protestantism and other false teachings. In fact, if you read all of scripture you would see that scripture itself tells us that it is hard to understand. Again this just proves why we need apostolic teaching to first get one into the proper context.

2 Peter 3:15-16
"…beloved brother Paul, according to the wisdom given him, wrote to you, 16 as also in all his letters, speaking in them of these things, in* which are some things hard to understand, which the untaught and unstable distort, as they do also the rest of the Scriptures, to their own destruction.***

What is easy “my friend” is just showing Christian courtesy of being corrected and responding to the 15 scripture verses in the need to confess sins that I presented earlier. These all prove to even the skeptic the necessity of orally confessing one’s sins. Also please respond to the the posting I made of the 10 Early Church Father’s teachings that prove the early Christians ALL believed in confessing sins to a priest. And after that explain why you disobey apostolic teaching and do not confess your sins?

Go back and respond to these posts:

Many NT scripture verses proving we must confess our sins
forums.catholic-questions.org/showpost.php?p=4869451&postcount=85

Many Early Church Father’s Teachings on The Early Church’s Practice of Confessing Sins.
forums.catholic-questions.org/showpost.php?p=4871402&postcount=119

Can you point to any early Christian history or document that tells us that early Christians did not confess their sins and went against the apostolic teaching? Note that I do not consider the mid 1500’s Protestant Revolution’s new practice of not confessing sins as “early church” since this is a reformed neo-Christianity that does not resemble what the early church did and is not the same “Christianity”.

James

II Timothy 3:16 All scripture is given by inspiration of who God and is profitable for what doctrine, for reproof, for correcton for instruction in righteousness that the man of God may be complete thoroughly equipped for every good Work. God is the authority by who we learn his word. No where in the NT is there a command that we confess our sins to a priest for forgiveness. Read I Tim 2:5 where does it say to confess your sins to a priest. Matt 27:51 we now have access to God through a new and living way, not through some priest. II Tim 2:15 Be diligent to present yourself approved to God a worker who does not need to be ashamed rightly divinding the word of truth. You have yet to prove your case. Thanks anyway.
God Bless, My friend

 

[Seeking12]

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

**James is speaking about being justified before men; if you look at the previous passages about the poor and the hungry; the good works are seen by men. He he comparing and contrasting what a person with true saving faith looks like compared to a dead faith. God doesn’t need to to see anyones good works. Just like Abraham and rehab; their deeds were seen before man but their righteousness came prior to that because they what? Believed God.

Works are the result of saving faith, not the means of saving faith. This is a gross error and equates to “another” gospel based on works.

I’m not sure what the issue was on john 20:22-23, but it is not that difficult in light of Matthew 16 and Matthew 18 if you are not a “natural man”; if so then it will be impossible to understand. **

 

[PetersKeys]

Well, lots of Catholics share your opinion. But, Father C. doesn’t teach this idea. I was amazed @ his teaching on topic, and how liberal he was on Protestants getting to heaven w/o becoming Catholic.

For him, salvation is all about Trinitarian Baptism and having rightly oriented intentions.

I think it really depends on how antagonistic protestants are toward the True faith. Some protestants don’t actively preach against the Church in schism. The ones that do however(try to plant seeds of schism and heresy) damage their salvation greatly because they attack the apostolic seal of our Church and thus attack Christ and his apostles.

 

[guanophore]

Why would anyone need to confess their sins to a priest.

Because that is how Jesus set things up, and He did not do things without “need”. I think (this is my personal opinion) that this method is designed to help us get over our shame and pride, which are the main shortcomings that prevent us from being honest with ourselves, God, and one another.

In Mk 15:38 it says the veil of the temple was torn in two signifying that the way into God’s presence was open by the death of his son.

This is why confession works!

You no longer had to go to the priest for your sins. I Tim 2:5 says “There is one God and one Mediator between God and men, the Man Christ Jesus”.

Only Jesus can mediate our salvation. However, Jesus instituted various ministries in the church to mediate His grace to us. it is not a 'have to" but a “get to”!

Throughout the bible it is faith and faith alone that is commanded as a condition for receiving God’s gift of Salvation. John 3:16, Acts 16:30-31 and John 3:36. A person does not have to go to a priest to have any hope of salvation. God Bless

We read it differently.

Catholics understand that faith is never alone, and that our salvation is based on His grace!

I do agree, however, that one does not have to go to a priest to have “any hope” of salvation. The priests of the Church are caught up into the eternal priesthood of Christ. He is the priest that mediates our salvation, for there is no other name under heaven by which we may be saved.

This passage doesn’t say we need to confess our sins to a priest for forgiveness. It is talking about making restitution to the one that we have trespassed against.

Do you not agree that God is one of the Ones we have trespassed against? The priest helps us to be reconciled to God. That is why it is called the ministry of reconciliation!

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

I am sure that this is what your anti-Catholic sources have told you. However, this is exactly what is happening in this passage. You are not to interpret it that way, or you could not justify leaving the Catholic Church!

and let people into heaven.

Actually, it is sin that keep us from heaven, so I agree with you that Jesus is not giving the Apostles the power to withhold heaven. It is witheld from those who are not in right relationship with God (dead in sin). What He gave the Apsostles was the authority to forgive and retain sins. In order to exercise this authority, they needed to hear the confessions.

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."

Yes. Jesus is telling the Apostles that he will send His spirit to guide them into all truth, and that they will have the discernment to know the difference.

The disciples dor any one else do not forgive sins.

Such a statement cannot be supported scripturally. In fact, scripture testifies to the opposite!

Even the lord’s prayer says otherwise!

They proclaimed forgiveness on the basis of the message of the Gospel. Mark 2:7 “Who can forgive sins but God only.”

No, but this is a good way to twist the scripture so that confession of sins can be abandoned.

You are using the words of disbelievers and detractors to support your erroneous view. Why? Because the text is clear that God gave this authority on earth “to men”.

This passage does not say we need to go to a priest because the sinner who repents to God has already been forgiven.

The scripture also says that confessing sins to the priest is healing. This is God’s plan of how to help us heal from the wounds caused by sins.

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.”

yes! The Sacrament is a channel of God’s saving grace.

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.

indeed! our works “complete” our faith. The only thing that matters is faith, working through love.

In short James 5:16 that he is talking about are among the saints. He was was not suggesting confessing our sins to a preacher or priest. We confess our sins first of all to the Lord I Jn 1:9 this is pretty clear. But we must also confess them to those who have been affected by them.

you are right, he was not “suggesting”. This language is in the imperative mode. It is a commandment. We are to call for the elders, confess sins, and pray, so that healing can happen.

i agree that it is also helpful to make reconciliation with those whom we have harmed, but sometimes, this is not possible. At these times especially, the priest can stand in for others as well as for God. He acts in the person of Christ.

 

[guanophore]

No where in this passage do i read that one must confess their sins to any one. It is talking about making restitution. NKJV

What does your bible say instead of this in vs. 7

Num 5:6-7
“he shall confess his sin which he has committed” ?

Confession is part of restitution. It is very difficult to have restitution if one does not take responpsibility for one’s wrongdoing.

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.

Do you have any idea where your Bible came from? There is no conflict between the Bible and the Teaching of the Church because they both came from the same Source. The entire NT is completely the product of Catholic Sacred Tradition. The whole NT was ‘added’ by the Catholic Church.

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.

Perhaps we are making some progress, and you are willing to agree that confession is, indeed, happening?

I agree, the passage above is about restitution between people. But you can also see that, when there is no one to whom restitution can be made, it goes ‘to the lord’ in the person of the priest.

Num 5:5-10
5 And the LORD said to Moses, 6 “Say to the people of Israel, When a man or woman commits any of the sins that men commit by breaking faith with the LORD, and that person is guilty, 7 he shall confess his sin which he has committed; and he shall make full restitution for his wrong, adding a fifth to it, and giving it to him to whom he did the wrong. 8 But if the man has no kinsman to whom restitution may be made for the wrong, the restitution for wrong shall go to the LORD for the priest, in addition to the ram of atonement with which atonement is made for him. 9 And every offering, all the holy things of the people of Israel, which they bring to the priest, shall be his; 10 and every man’s holy things shall be his; whatever any man gives to the priest shall be his.”

This is a type and shadow of what happens in the NT, when the priest stands in on behalf of the community (the church) and also for God.

Lev 5:4-6
5 When a man is guilty in any of these, he shall confess the sin he has committed, 6 and he shall bring his guilt offering to the LORD for the sin which he has committed, a female from the flock, a lamb or a goat, for a sin offering; and the priest shall make atonement for him for his sin.

This is a type and shadow of what was to come. In the NT, Jesus is our sacrificial lamb. When we confess our sins to the priest, our sins are forgiven, just as Jesus commanded.

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

It would be important to interpret it this way, to abrogate the Apostolic Teaching. When one applies some common sense to this, it is clear that there would be no reason to retain and forgive sins if all of them were forgiven already.

II Timothy 3:16 All scripture is given by inspiration of who God and is profitable for what doctrine, for reproof, for correcton for instruction in righteousness that the man of God may be complete thoroughly equipped for every good Work. God is the authority by who we learn his word.

I agree. Jesus passed His authority on to his Apostles, and those to their successors. This was so that the Scripture would not be misused.

No where in the NT is there a command that we confess our sins to a priest for forgiveness.

Well, we read it differently!

James commands us to call for the priests, and to confess our sins. Why would you want to confess them to someone who had not had been given the authority by God to forgive them?

Read I Tim 2:5 where does it say to confess your sins to a priest.

The Catholic Church does not create doctrines from single verses of the Bible. We receive the teaching of Jesus through the Apostles. This is what they taught.

Matt 27:51 we now have access to God through a new and living way, not through some priest.

you are creating a false dichotomy. The priest is the new and living way that we can access the grace of reconciliation.

 II Tim 2:15 Be diligent to present yourself approved to God a worker who does not need to be ashamed rightly divinding the word of truth. You have yet to prove your case. Thanks anyway.

God Bless, My friend

I don’t believe that Scripture was ever intended to function as ‘proof’. it is a testimony of faith. When you reject the faith that was handed down to us from the Apostles, and separate the Scripture created by that faith from the Teaching out of which it was produced, all kinds of error ensues.

 

[tobinatorstark]

I guess ppasa316 doesn’t want to respond to my posts anymore

 

[CentralFLJames]

I told you i was not going anywhere. Is that too hard for you to understand as well. I gave you answers but you do not want to research yourself. I will always stand by God’s Word. I do not get into subjects that i do not understand. I also stand by what scholars say on the subject. Have a blessed day. God Bless Friend:thumbsup:

It seems to me you are arbitrarily choosing who you accept as “scholars”. Who are you going to believe to be a scholar in scriptures - the people who actually brought it to you (Catholic Church) or the people who try to steal it, take out 10% of it, complete change and add new words (e.g. faith “alone”), and give all new teaching traditions in highly edited utube debates that never have before been heard in The Church?

The only authority on the planet is The Catholic Church - everyone else are just critics and enemies of The Church that God has give to The Catholic Church as gifts to prove how correct The Catholic Church is in teachings. God uses all the heretics to prove His Church and to reveal deeper meanings in scripture through combating the errors. The problem is that you think the men in the black hats are the good guys and can’t even discern that they might be quick on the draw but can’t hit the broad side of a barn with logic or truth and might as well be shooting blanks.

I may have more to say later on the Ackerberg utube videos that pit staunch anti-catholic book seller Martin against the extremely competent and scholar Pacwa (Jesuit Priest) who is making Martin look silly and Ackerberg looking like he has egg on his face every time he cuts to commercial to cut him off when Pacwa makes preemptive points. Ackerberg is simply using a much more intellectual men (Pacwa and to lesser degree Martin) to draw a large audience to make money in promoting his highly edited debate tapes. The utube videos are incomplete and broken up over multiple weeks of air time and Ankerberg uses up between 40%-50% of each video segment for his own face time to introduce himself and frame the context he wants us to see. In these intro’s he paints himself like an unbiased moderator using dubbed in video of just himself to editorialize and frame the debates (after the fact). It’s pure fraud and one can tell from the gaping holes in the dialog progression that he cherry picked the parts he wanted everyone else to hear. Pacwa cleaned their clock and if you think differently then you can’t differentiate a charitable victory from an undignified retreat. Ackerberg had egg all over his face when Pacwa proved that Protestants were essentially using scripture to write scripture before it was historically complete just to give themselves the authority of sola scriptura rather than admit the pope (the bishop of Rome) was always the authority of The Church and the laity had no independent authority.

I’d love to be able to find the full Ankerberg debates online but utube is notorious for letting hit and run anti-Catholics post materials that are incomplete. And I am not about to pay $ to Ackerberg to buy his money-making reproduction of the “produced” debate.

James

 

[Michael_Francis]

This thread had drifted off topic and has been split to allow discussion/debate on OSAS in the following thread.

Please remain scrupulously on topic from now on.

Split: OSAS (from Father Corapi … on Baptism & Protestants)

Very sincerely,

 

[Church_Militant]

I will always stand by God’s Word. I do not get into subjects that i do not understand. I also stand by what scholars say on the subject. Have a blessed day. God Bless Friend:thumbsup:

Then let’s look at the scriptures on confessing sins.

John 20:21-23 is so important.
“21 He said therefore to them again: Peace be to you. As the Father hath sent me, I also send you. 22 When he had said this, he breathed on them; and he said to them: Receive ye the Holy Ghost. 23 Whose sins you shall forgive, they are forgiven them; and whose sins you shall retain, they are retained.”

My thinking is that if our Lord had not intended to make the Sacrament of Reconciliation a means of grace unto salvation, then why in the world would He have made this statement and given both this power and command to the presbyters of His church?

James 5:16 & 1st John 1:9 also offer us more insight into this doctrine.

James 5: 14 Is any man sick among you? Let him bring in the priests of the church, and let them pray over him, anointing him with oil in the name of the Lord. 15 And the prayer of faith shall save the sick man: and the Lord shall raise him up: and if he be in sins, they shall be forgiven him. 16 Confess therefore your sins one to another: and pray one for another, that you may be saved. For the continual prayer of a just man availeth much.

1st John 1:9 If we confess our sins, he is faithful and just, to forgive us our sins, and to cleanse us from all iniquity.

All these passages expressly speak of confession of sins and so I have to ask, then just how will those outside the Catholic Church explain the obvious link between these passages?

Here is a further outline for study on this sacrament courtesy of John Martignoni and his Bible Christian Society.

Confession

A. Confess your sins to men
~ Leviticus 5:5-6 (“All scripture…”: 2 Tim 3:16)
(Law is a shadow: Hebrews 10:1)
~ 1 John 1:9
~ James 5:16

B. Can men forgive sins?
~ Only God has the power to forgive sins but He exercises this power through men.
~ Mark 2:7
~ Matthew 9:1-8
When the crowds saw it, they were afraid , and the glorified God, who had given such authority to men.

• Matthew 9:8

To me, the scriptures are clear, and I can’t help but praise and thank God for His wisdom and mercy that (knowing the weaknesses of mankind) equipped His church with the means to help His children overcome our weaknesses and sins.