Protestant that agree...

[FredSmith]

A Priest does’nt forgive one, but acts as an agent of God (the way Protestant pastors claim to be) in asserting the person’s worthiness of forgiveness.

I certainly hope there are no Protestant or Baptist pastors like that!

Non-believers tell their friends their sins, they confess their sins to a therapist or to a pastor, but when it comes to confessing their sins to a Priest, then there’s a problem.

That’s because most people don’t believe that their friends have the authority to act on God’s behalf.

The Priest consuls the sinner and tells him what he needs to do to rectify the situation. Left to our own consciences, we might think that it’s ok to steal as long as we’re sorry afterwards, but the Priest will tell that person that we must give back what we’ve stolen therefore, giving the sin no profit.

And the priest will also give the person a series of special prayers to say.

He is, for lack of a better word, a specialist, not a part time man of God, part time lover to his wife, part time father to his children, part time cab driver, etc…but a full time man of God, 24/7.

Excuse me, but are you implying that non-Roman Catholic pastors are only “part-timers”?

My favorite words to hear…

Our Lord Jesus Christ, who has left power to his Church to

absolve all sinners who truly repent and believe in him, of

his great mercy forgive you all your offenses; and by his

authority committed to me, I absolve you from all your sins:

In the Name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy

Spirit. Amen.

Almost every time, it brings tears to my eyes.

It brings tears to mine, too, but for an altogether different reason.

 

[2ndGen]

The only reason I wouldn’t call it a creed is that creeds are objective and authoritative, and mutually agreed on.

The sinner’s prayer is none of those things. I wouldn’t argue with someone who calls it a creed, but I wouldn’t call it that.

Your own words:

The “sinner’s prayer” isn’t a means to salvation, it’s just a way to codify what the Bible says we do to be saved: “confess with your mouth and believe in your heart that Christ is Lord”, repent, and place your faith in Christ’s atonement on the cross for the forgiveness of sins.

creed
noun

1. any system, doctrine, or formula of religious belief, as of a denomination.
2. any system or codification of belief or of opinion.
3. an authoritative, formulated statement of the chief articles of Christian belief, as the Apostles’ Creed, the Nicene Creed, or the Athanasian Creed.
4. the creed. Apostles’ Creed.

Sounds like a creed to me.

 

[2ndGen]

The Catholic determination of what a “creed” is?

A profession of faith.

 

[jmcrae]

And the priest will also give the person a series of special prayers to say.

Yes, of course. The reason for this is in order to restore our broken relationship with God. We do this through prayer.

Excuse me, but are you implying that non-Roman Catholic pastors are only “part-timers”?

Is it not true that they are not available 24 hours, seven days a week? They take time for their wives and families (as of course is their God-given duty as husbands and fathers) which makes them unavailable for pastoral work at certain times of the day; thus “part time,” unless we think of pastoral work as “just another job,” in which case, a 40-hour week would be considered “full time.”

So, if it’s just another secular job, then if they are putting in 40 hours or more per week, then they are “full time,” but if they see it as a calling from God, but are not putting in every moment of their lives, then no, it’s not “full time.”

 

[FredSmith]

Your own words:

creed
noun

1. any system, doctrine, or formula of religious belief, as of a denomination.
2. any system or codification of belief or of opinion.
3. an authoritative, formulated statement of the chief articles of Christian belief, as the Apostles’ Creed, the Nicene Creed, or the Athanasian Creed.
4. the creed. Apostles’ Creed.

Sounds like a creed to me.

Like I said, it’s too trivial to waste my time arguing about so if you want to believe it’s a creed, knock yourself out.

 

[FredSmith]

Yes, of course. The reason for this is in order to restore our broken relationship with God. We do this through prayer.

Then, by your own admission, my statement is true.

Is it not true that they are not available 24 hours, seven days a week?

We’re available as much as humanly possible.

I don’t know any pastor who wouldn’t drop everything if someone in his congregation needed him.

My brother and I have season tickets to the Phillies. Two Roman Catholic priests hold the seats right in front of us and they’re there at least every game we are.

Why aren’t they back at the church?

They take time for their wives and families (as of course is their God-given duty as husbands and fathers) which makes them unavailable for pastoral work at certain times of the day; thus “part time,”

I have a wife and five children. I’ve never had any conflict between church and family.

The truth is, I’ve heard this bogus claim before and not one of you who make it could do a tenth of the work it takes to be a Christian pastor.

 

[fbl9]

dear dear FredSmith myself as a farmer iwork up to 18hrs a day i still make it to mass ever sunday even if i worked 24hrs which i have i still went to mass. you don’t know what work really is.

 

[jmcrae]

Then, by your own admission, my statement is true.

Yes, it is. What’s wrong with praying?

My brother and I have season tickets to the Phillies. Two Roman Catholic priests hold the seats right in front of us and they’re there at least every game we are.

Why aren’t they back at the church?

They’ve probably got their phones with them. If they’re needed, they’ll return to the Church.

I have a wife and five children. I’ve never had any conflict between church and family.

How big is your congregation? (Nobody has ever called you at suppertime, or while you were helping the kids with their homework?)

 

[SyCarl]

Only a Pharisee could teach in the Temple. Jesus was called “teacher” or “rabbi” by Pharisees. Therefore, they acknowledged his authority to teach as a Pharisee and even Jesus defended the Pharisees authority to teach as well.

This is where their hypocricy is exposed, he never discredited their authority, only their actions.

Jesus is not only “our priest” but is The Priest. The, not our, not a, but The. He is above all Priests and all Priests are subject to Him. He is God’s High Priest and His Apostles are The Priesthood he left behind for us when He commissioned them to do His work in His name.

Well, see, you’re dividing the various forms of priests when under Jesus there is only one Priesthood. The only Priesthood that matters after Christ is His (which is that of the men He personally annonted and ordained to carry on His work).

Today, the priesthood of the Pharisees is alive and well in their descendants…the Orothodox Jew.

That was not the only requirement at that particular posting, it was also that they had been with Christ since the beginning of the ministry, right?

Now, I ask you…what part of Paul’s being an Apostle is “not” scriptural?

He didn’t walk with Christ.

And His appointment came directly from Christ and was confirmed by Peter. For 3 years after his encounter with Jesus, he did no preaching. He had to go meet with the Prime Apostle, the shephard that Jesus left us in John 21, the tender of His Flock, Simon The Rock, aka Peter.

It was only “after” he spent a couple of weeks with Peter in discernment that Paul was allowed to begin His ministry.

Why? Because Jesus told Peter that whatever he bound or loosened on earth would be done the same in heaven (showing that his authority came from and his guidance came from heaven).

So Peter bound Paul preach and he was off!

(I lovvvvvvve Paul!)

At present there is no Jewish priesthood. No rabbi would claim to be a priest because a priest must be descended from Aaron.

With respect to Paul, of course Jesus Himself could pick anyone He wanted to be an Apostole. Some on these boards and elsewhere have insisted the Paul was ordained by Ananias, who they assert was a bishop, on his arrival in Damascus. However I do not that Chrysostom indicated that Ananias was someone of no consequence.

With respect to Paul’s first visit to Jerusalem, he doesn’t say he what happened during his meeting with Petere. However he did go on missionary journeys after this meeting. He then relates what happened at the Council of Jerusalem. It was here that his apostleship to the Gentiles was recognized, and not just by Peter. He had been preaching well before this time.

 

[jmcrae]

At present there is no Jewish priesthood. No rabbi would claim to be a priest because a priest must be descended from Aaron.

With respect to Paul, of course Jesus Himself could pick anyone He wanted to be an Apostole. Some on these boards and elsewhere have insisted the Paul was ordained by Ananias, who they assert was a bishop, on his arrival in Damascus. However I do not that Chrysostom indicated that Ananias was someone of no consequence.

Ananias baptized him, and it also seems as though he gave him Confirmation and First Holy Communion as well (the “breaking of the bread.”) but I don’t see where he could have ordained him - it seems from reading the second letter to Timothy as though Peter or one of the other Apostles must have ordained him; it doesn’t seem like he was ordained straight away. He seems to have begun preaching before he was ordained, which is fine - we are all called to be preachers, when it comes to working in the streets.

With respect to Paul’s first visit to Jerusalem, he doesn’t say he what happened during his meeting with Peter. However he did go on missionary journeys after this meeting.

It seems to me that this is when he must have been ordained, since it is directly after this time that he starts to confer the Sacraments on others.

 

[O.S.Luke]

Is it not true that they are not available 24 hours, seven days a week? They take time for their wives and families (as of course is their God-given duty as husbands and fathers) which makes them unavailable for pastoral work at certain times of the day; thus “part time,” unless we think of pastoral work as “just another job,” in which case, a 40-hour week would be considered “full time.”

So, if it’s just another secular job, then if they are putting in 40 hours or more per week, then they are “full time,” but if they see it as a calling from God, but are not putting in every moment of their lives, then no, it’s not “full time.”

Now this is the first time I have ever heard this argument before, that Protestant pastors are just “part-time.”

I am expected to be available at anytime, 24 hours a day, 7 days a week. It’s not just another job - it is a Christian vocation. And I am appointed to a parish and community, not just a church.

I have come back from more than one vacation to preside at a funeral. I have missed birthday parties and anniversary celebrations because of emergency room calls, car wrecks, and family crises. Holy Week, Easter, Thanksgiving, Christmas Eve and Day - those are days that I won’t be around family very often, and they know that.

There are very few weeks I work 40 hours. It is usually somewhere between 60 and 80 hours a week. And I am hardly alone. When I was an associate pastor in a large church, it was often more like 90 hours a week, as I also worked with 80-some youth and coordinated education and program ministries, taught confirmation classes, etc.

Every moment of my life is part of my fulfilling the call from God. That doesn’t stop me from being a son, nephew, an uncle, a father, or a husband. But I am well aware that it means conflicts. And you have obviously forgotten that some pastors are single; unmarried or widowers.

At my last parish, the priest there was my tennis partner. One of the things we tried to keep each other honest about was taking sabbath time - even God took a day off. It’s hard to do, tho.

I know very few “part-time” priests or pastors, jmcrae, if any. On this one, you are dead wrong.

O+

 

[2ndGen]

Like I said, it’s too trivial to waste my time arguing about so if you want to believe it’s a creed, knock yourself out.

No argument from me.

You stated it was to “codify” a belief,
the definition of the word creed states that exact same sentiment,
that is is codification of a belief.

I was just showing you that it “is” a creed.

 

[2ndGen]

And the priest will also give the person a series of special prayers to say.

 

[FredSmith]

Just like in Isaiah, the scripture which Jesus referred to when he healed a man and sent him to a Priest (not a pastor).

Please explain what verse you’re talking about.

Not implying it, they are. They admit it. When they take their kids to school, are they doing it in the name of the congregation?

Well, my church knows that I’m there for them full time. I guess that’s all that matters.

 

[FredSmith]

They’ve probably got their phones with them. If they’re needed, they’ll return to the Church.

And you don’t think that I would come back if somebody needed me?

How big is your congregation?

About 200 people.

(Nobody has ever called you at suppertime, or while you were helping the kids with their homework?)

They sure have. And if it’s something that they need me to come to be with them, then I call my wife. That is, after all, why God gave me a partner. Your priests don’t have that.

 

[FredSmith]

dear dear FredSmith myself as a farmer iwork up to 18hrs a day i still make it to mass ever sunday even if i worked 24hrs which i have i still went to mass. you don’t know what work really is.

If it’s so easy, then why aren’t you a pastor?

 

[sandusky]

Don’t think I didn’t see that one coming! LOL!

And this leads us into the debate about “sacramentals”…why don’t non-Catholic Christians believe in the use of items (like cloth or holy water or annointing oil, etc…) in worship?

(and that verse spoke of “things” that Paul touched physically, not supernatural like Jesus’ breath or Peter’s shadow…but I invite you to try again because I would love to see an instance where another Apostles had supernatural powers that didn’t require their physically touching someone to heal them).

You’re amusing…

 

[2ndGen]

Please explain what verse you’re talking about.

Not Isaiah (my mistake, I’m in between threads);
Leviticus is more appropriate:

Matthew 8
1 And when he was come down from the mountain, great multitudes followed him.

2 And behold, there came to him a leper and worshipped him, saying, Lord, if thou wilt, thou canst make me clean.

3 And he stretched forth his hand, and touched him, saying, I will; be thou made clean. And straightway his leprosy was cleansed.

4 And Jesus saith unto him, See thou tell no man; but go, show thyself to the priest, and offer the gift that Moses commanded, for a testimony unto them.

The healing that is prescribed is described in Leviticus 14:2-57

Too long to post, but for those interested in what Jesus told this man to do…

biblegateway.com/passage/…57;&version=9;

 

[2ndGen]

GOD uses His priests as His instruments of reconciliation. The New Covenant priesthood is prefigured or ‘typed’ in many places in the Old Testament. Here are several examples from the Old Testament of reconciliation and atonement being performed by a priest:

Leviticus 4:20, “…Thus the priest shall make atonement for them, and they will be forgiven.”

Leviticus 4:26, “Thus the priest shall make atonement for the prince’s sin, and it will be forgiven.”

Leviticus 4:32, “Thus the priest shall make atonement for him, and he will be forgiven.”

Leviticus 4:35, “Thus the priest shall make atonement for the man’s sin, and it will be forgiven.”

Leviticus 5:5-6, “…then whoever is guilty in any of these cases shall confess the sin he has incurred, and as his sin offering for his sin he has committed he shall bring to the Lord a female animal from the flock, a ewe lamb or a she-goat. The priest shall then make atonement for his sin.”
See also Leviticus 5:10,13,16,18, 12:8, 14:18-20,31, 15:15,30, 19:22.

Leviticus 6:7, “And the priest shall make an atonement for him before the Lord; and it shall be forgiven him for any thing of all that he has done in trespassing therein.”

Leviticus 7:7, “Because the sin offering and the guilt offering are alike, both having the same ritual, the guilt offering likewise belongs to the priest who makes atonement with it.”

Leviticus 16:32, “This atonement is to be made by the priest who has been anointed and ordained to the priesthood in succession to his father.”

Leviticus 19:20-22, “If a man lies carnally with a woman . . . they shall not be put to death . . . but he shall bring a guilt offering for himself to the Lord, to the door of the tent of meeting, a ram for a guilt offering. And the priest shall make atonement for him . . . before the Lord for his sin which he has committed, and the sin which he has committed shall be forgiven him.”

Numbers 6:11, “The priest shall offer up the one as a sin offering and the other as a holocaust, thus making atonement for him for the sin he has committed by reason of the dead person.”

Numbers 15:25, “And the priest shall make an atonement for all the congregation of the children of Israel, and it shall be forgiven them…”

Numbers 15:28, “And the priest shall make atonement before the Lord for him who sinned inadvertently; when atonement has been made for him, he will be forgiven.”

 

[2ndGen]

The priest has been given the ministry of reconciliation. He mediates GOD’s forgiveness to the sinner. The priest is merely an instrument of GOD. As an analogy, think of GOD as the Supreme Healer, the Master Surgeon. He will remove the cancer of sin from the soul, while using one of His priests as the scalpel.

This GOD given ministry is shown very plainly in Holy Scripture:

Matthew 16:19, when Jesus gave the power and authority to Peter, “And I will give you the keys of the kingdom of heaven; and whatever you shall bind on earth shall be bound in heaven, and whatever you shall loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven.”

Matthew 18:18, Jesus gave this power to all of the Apostles, “Amen I say to you, whatever you bind on earth shall be bound in heaven; and whatever you loose on earth shall be loosed also in heaven.”

John 20:21-23, “He therefore said to them again, ‘Peace be to you! As the Father has sent Me, I also send you’. When He had said this, He breathed upon them, and said to them, ‘Receive the Holy Spirit; whose sins you shall forgive, they are forgiven them; and whose sins you shall retain, they are retained’.”

Matthew 10:40, “He who receives you receives Me; and he who receives Me, receives Him who sent Me.”

Luke 22:29-30, “And I appoint to you a kingdom, even as My Father has appointed to Me, so that you may eat and drink at my table in My kingdom; and you shall sit upon thrones, judging the twelve tribes of Israel.”

2Corinthians 5:17-20, “Therefore, if any one is in Christ, he is a new creation; the old has passed away, behold, the new has come. All this is from God, who through Christ reconciled us to himself and gave us the ministry of reconciliation; that is, in Christ God was reconciling the world to himself, not counting their trespasses against them, and entrusting to us the message of reconciliation. So we are ambassadors for Christ, GOD making his appeal through us. We beseech you on behalf of Christ, be reconciled to God.”

Clearly, the Apostles were given the authority to remit sins, or to bind them, in the person of Christ. How are they to accomplish this if they do not know what sins to remit or to bind? The sinner is required to confess his sins as shown.

1John 1:8-10, " If we say we have no sin, we deceive ourselves, and the truth is not in us. If we confess our sins, he is faithful and just, and will forgive our sins and cleanse us from all unrighteousness. If we say we have not sinned, we make him a liar, and his word is not in us."

---

---

The Apostles obviously would not live forever, and sin will always be with us, so they passed the authority on to others.

2Corinthians 2:10, “Whom you pardon anything, I also pardon. Indeed, what I have forgiven, if I have forgiven anything, I have done for your sakes, IN THE PERSON OF CHRIST.”

The priest says in the confessional, “I absolve you of your sins.” The priest is acting in Personna Christi, in the person of Christ. Since the priest is acting in the person of Christ, then it is Christ to whom you confess your sins. It is Christ alone who remits them. Jesus Christ uses the priest as His voice and His hands.

As mentioned earlier, the prophets of the Old Testament spoke in GOD’s name. They spoke IN THE PERSON OF GOD. The priests of the New Covenant speak IN THE PERSON OF CHRIST.
GOD never changes.

Matthew 9:5-8, “For which is easier to say, “Your sins are forgiven you, or to say arise and walk? But that you may know that the Son of Man has power to forgive sins” - then He said to the paralytic, “Arise, take up your pallet and go to your house”. And he arose, and went away to his house. But when the crowds saw it, they were struck with fear, AND GLORIFIED GOD WHO HAD GIVEN SUCH POWER TO MEN.”

The New Testament lies hidden in the Old and the Old Testament is revealed in the New.

home.inreach.com/bstanley/confess.htm