Protestants, can a Catholic Priest forgive sins?

[benedictus2]

Apology accepted. But there is no point in saying I was raised Catholic again. I have already said so at least twice and I’m still being asked to “tell the TRUTH” and told I am not believed.

The fact is, no matter what I say or even what proof I offer, everyone will believe what ever they choose to believe - despite the truth.

Regardless of that sad fact, I accept your apology and harbor no hard feelings.

At least 3 Catholics have made false accusations about me. It is unbecoming a Christian and breaks the 9th commandment.

But may God bless you Cinette. You have not chosen to not justify yourself, but to reach out in reconciliation.

So for you I say:

I was raised Catholic.
I was Baptized, received First Holy Communion and confirmed all at St. John’s Catholic Church, 35900 Lee Street, Whitehall, Wisconsin 54773, by Father Tyson - the priest when I was growing up in the sixties.

Jesus Christ is my Lord and Savior knows I am telling the truth.

The 60s and 70s (and I would say even up to now) is the heyday of dissent against the Church. There is a book called “Prodigal Daughters”. A very good read. You might want to check it out.

Now the dissent takes the form of liberalism and adherence to new-age mambo jambo.

But it is Christ’s Church which a lot of converts and reverts and have come to realize.

It is made up of sinners but interestingly is called the communion of saints. We are all destined to be one.
It is interesting that Christ chose Judas to be his disciple.

Interesting too that He would build his church upon Peter ( a man who would deny him) and give him the power to bind and lose in heaven and on earth.

 

[ChristianKnight]

ChristianKnight,

You are contradicting yourself! You say above that "you believe that the Church never ended THEN YOU SAY "The deciples have no power to do anything

If the Apostles can’t Pass their Power/AUTHORITY like YOU SAY then INDEED the Church ENDED.

ChristianKnight, do you then think that Jesus Christ wasted his time to find The Apostles?

Do YOU think that Jesus Christ wasted His time in giving this AUTHORITY to forgive mens sins to the Apostles since it was going to END with the Apostles?

How do you think the Church was built?

ChristianKnight, Truth is you are close to being a “Muslim or an Atheist” for they too believe that the Apostels have no Power of Authority to do anything! Does that sound familiar to you, Does it not scare you that you have the same feelings as they do?

Ufamtobie

When did I say either of them?..

Saving 1 life is not a wasted time, so saving many is not wasted

I don’t know, me and Roll talked a lot, somehow Peter ended in Rome?

And your close to being a idiot, No it doesn’t, cause I can have the same feelings as anyone, let me guess, your almighty church speaks against freedom of opinoin?

Who is the RCC? It is the church Jesus Christ established. Are you saying you are above Christ?

Are you sure about that? No I’m not.

Because Jesus Christ granted the Church to bind and loose. She has this authority since the time of the Apostles.

It is also for the protection of Non-Catholics. To received the Body and Blood of Jesus Christ equals murder. Even Catholics who commit a mortal sin cannot received Holy Communion. They are required by Code of Canon Law to received the Sacrament of Reconciliation (aka Confession) before receiving Holy Communion.

I highly recommend that you read this Article:

catholic.com/library/Who_Can_Receive_Communion.asp -Subject: Who Can Receive Communion?

He granted Peter that ability…

I read that scripture, and it doesn’t say Non-Catholics, it says those who are un-clean, and the RCC is the one saying its a mortal sin, not Jesus.

 

[celticcrusader]

 

[Cinette]

"Where ignorance is bliss, it is folly to be wise!!!

 

[Ginger2]

The 60s and 70s (and I would say even up to now) is the heyday of dissent against the Church.

I really don’t know what point you are trying to make. You have not reconciled Tradition with Scripture.

Jesus gave the Holy Spirit to His disciples. The Disciples gave the Holy Spirit to others. But the others were not able to pass the Holy Spirit on to anyone.

Concerning John 20:22-23?
And with that he breathed on them and said, “Receive the Holy Spirit. If you forgive anyone his sins, they are forgiven; if you do not forgive them, they are not forgiven.”

If this gift cannot be passed on since the last Apostle died, how can a priest claim to forgive and retain sins?

 

[Ginger2]

In another post someone said they disagreed with my interpretation of these verses, but I didn’t interpret them.

What is it you guys think I said is the meaning?

 

[Cinette]

I really don’t know what point you are trying to make. You have not reconciled Tradition with Scripture.

Jesus gave the Holy Spirit to His disciples. The Disciples gave the Holy Spirit to others. But the others were not able :ehh: to pass the Holy Spirit on to anyone.

Concerning John 20:22-23?
And with that he breathed on them and said, “Receive the Holy Spirit. If you forgive anyone his sins, they are forgiven; if you do not forgive them, they are not forgiven.”

If this gift cannot be passed on since the last Apostle died, how can a priest claim to forgive and retain sins? :bigyikes: :bigyikes:

Honestly Ginger, I fail to understand what you are trying to say and I leave it to Benedictus to respond or anyone else for that matter. If I recall correctly there were several posts explaining John 20:22;23.

I really don’t understand your understanding??

 

[Ginger2]

Cinette,

I’m not asking for him to explain John 20. I’m asking what his post has to do with John 20, which is at the heart of this thread.

Post #161 makes no sense in context of this thread. I would like to know what he is trying to say.

Then I asked a question that has come to my mind about John 20.

It is a new question and I don’t see why you react as tho you are offended by it.

I guess I should have put the question in a new post so it would not be confused. As I read my post, I see how it is confusing. The two questions kind of run together.

 

[Ginger2]

I really don’t understand your understanding??

My understanding is Scripture is consistent and one Scripture does not contradict another.

If an interpretation contradicts another teaching in Scripture, then that interpretation is wrong.

If Catholics want to convince me their interpretation of John is correct, then you must reconcile it with the whole of Scriptures.

I hope this helps you better understand my position.

 

[Cinette]

Cinette,

I’m not asking for him to explain John 20. I’m asking what his post has to do with John 20, which is at the heart of this thread.

Post #161 makes no sense in context of this thread. I would like to know what he is trying to say.

Then I asked a question that has come to my mind about John 20.

It is a new question and I don’t see why you react as tho you are offended by it.

I guess I should have put the question in a new post so it would not be confused. As I read my post, I see how it is confusing. The two questions kind of run together.

Hi Ginger! - offended? No. Confused? Yes!

Will go that other post and see what I can make of it. Don’t fret - we will get to the bottom of this.

Cheers

 

[Hisalone]

I really don’t know what point you are trying to make. You have not reconciled Tradition with Scripture.

Jesus gave the Holy Spirit to His disciples. The Disciples gave the Holy Spirit to others. But the others were not able to pass the Holy Spirit on to anyone.

Concerning John 20:22-23?
And with that he breathed on them and said, “Receive the Holy Spirit. If you forgive anyone his sins, they are forgiven; if you do not forgive them, they are not forgiven.”

If this gift cannot be passed on since the last Apostle died, how can a priest claim to forgive and retain sins?

All disciples can forgive sins forwe have been given the ministry of reconciliation. What is the ministry of reconciliation? It is reconciling man with God. The Holy Ghost is alive and well in 2008 doing the work the Father intended for Him

 

[Ginger2]

Hi Ginger! - offended? No. Confused? Yes!

“Confused” is my fault. I ran the two questions together.

But I would like to know how Catholics reconcile the fact that only the Apostles could pass on the gift of the Holy Spirit and their disciples/successors could not.

 

[Ginger2]

I think the gift of the Holy Spirit given the Apostles was not the same as the Holy Spirit given to all Christians though out the ages. Thus far, Catholics should agree…

…however, the question remains, was this special gift permitted to continue past the Apostolic age?

If so, then it is not limited to priests. As tons of people in the Book of Acts were given the Holy Spirit - entire congregations.

For protestants this is not a problem. All Christians are a priesthood. But for Catholics who believe the gift is limited to Catholic priests, this seems to pose a problem.

 

[Cinette]

“Confused” is my fault. I ran the two questions together.

But I would like to know how Catholics reconcile the fact that only the Apostles could pass on the gift of the Holy Spirit and their disciples/successors could not.

OK Ginger - let me give this a try. Remember I am no theologian ok?

I don’t think that “Catholics” only can pass on the gift of the Holy Spirit. The gifts of the Holy Spirit is what you mean to say (Knowledge, Understanding,Discernment, Faith, Tongues…). First of all we all receive the Holy Spirit when we are Baptised. It must be a valid baptism with water and in the name of the Father, the Son and the Holy Spirit. So all validly baptised Christians - Catholics and otherChristians - receive the H Spirit at Baptism.

Then again at Confirmation. Usually children in their early teens are prepared over a period of 2 years for Confirmation. The Bishop will lay hands on each individual and evoke the Holy Spirit - the individual must ask for the gifts and also yield to these gifts. Receiving the Holy Spirit is not something exclusively Catholic. Don’t ask me to explain how but I also believe the Holy Spirit has ways of working through non-Christian faiths as well. Anyone who is good it is good thru the power of the Spirit - they are not just naturally good - it is the Spirit.

Sometimes as I am driving I might sing “Spirit of the Living God fall afresh on me…” The Spirit is with us always.

What the Apostles were given as well as the gift of the Spirit was the power to forgive sins and this goes together with their Ministry to spread the good news, to Minister the Sacraments etc. What the Apostles passed on to their successors was the sacrament of Holy Orders (priesthood). The CC expects priests to dedicate themselves to the Church. Since a married man is expected to love his wife and dedicate himself first to his family it is difficult to expect him to also shepherd the flock. Hence, the requirement that priests should not be married.

There have been a large number of Episcopal priests who have come over to the CC and the Vatican has allowed their ordination (not all) Catholic priests and have accepted them and their families.

I think there should be an order for married priests. I believe some are called to be both priests and fathers. Somebody might shoot me for saying this.

Have I answered your question?

 

[Cinette]

I think the gift of the Holy Spirit given the Apostles was not the same as the Holy Spirit given to all Christians though out the ages. Thus far, Catholics should agree…

…however, the question remains, was this special gift permitted to continue past the Apostolic age?

If so, then it is not limited to priests. As tons of people in the Book of Acts were given the Holy Spirit - entire congregations.

For protestants this is not a problem. All Christians are a priesthood. But for Catholics who believe the gift is limited to Catholic priests, this seems to pose a problem.

I have just seen this after I had replied to your previous post. I think I answered your question - most of it.

We believe in the priesthood of the laity but that is different from Holy Orders.

Once somebody asked me to explain the H Spirit and I got the idea of comparing the H Spirit with the operating system on a computer (you know, Window, Linux etc.) Without the operating system the computer cannot function. We can only function effectively spiritually through the power of the H Spirit. Then one day as I was talking about tht I thought, wait a minute the computer has Word and then it needs Power - so I tried to explain the Trinity that way!

I am sure that some of the other posters on this thread can also contribute with their perspectives.

Cheers
Cinette

 

[Ginger2]

Yes Cinette you did a very good job of explaining.

I agree with you that when someone in the New Testament was given the Holy Spirit it is not always referring to the same thing. One Spirit, yes. But receiving that Spirit can refer to being given different blessing and not necessarily mean everyone has the same power to do something.

Two different questions:
Do you have Scripture to support your explanation?
Do you have catechism support for your explanation?

 

[Ginger2]

Once somebody asked me to explain the H Spirit and I got the idea of comparing the H Spirit with the operating system on a computer (you know, Window, Linux etc.) Without the operating system the computer cannot function. We can only function effectively spiritually through the power of the H Spirit. Then one day as I was talking about tht I thought, wait a minute the computer has Word and then it needs Power - so I tried to explain the Trinity that way!

I am sure that some of the other posters on this thread can also contribute with their perspectives.

Cheers
Cinette

I think that was very clever.

 

[Peter_J]

This is what you asked and I answered.

tsk tsk on you.

Quite frankly, the fact of the matter is that the Catholic Church has very little control over what individual Catholics say on the internet. Posts such as the one you’re complaining about here (or like the one ChristianKnight quotes in his signature, or like the post that says “It is a mortal sin to receive the Eucharist if not a Baptized and Communicant in the Catholic church”) are going to keep happening – other Catholics like myself can say “This post (or this blog, etc., as the case may be) does not represent us”, but we can’t actually stop it.

Think of it this way: suppose an American got on the internet and posted a rude comment about the French. I, as another American, could say “Just for the record, I do not agree with what was said about the French. Nor is that the attitude that most Americans have toward the French, in my experience.” But I could not (even if I were the President) honestly say “This won’t happen anymore. Henceforth, no Americans will post those particular statements on the internet.”

 

[Ginger2]

Quite frankly, the fact of the matter is that the Catholic Church has very little control over what individual Catholics say on the internet. Posts such as the one you’re complaining about here…are going to keep happening – other Catholics like myself can say “This post does not represent us”, but we can’t actually stop it.

Thank you. The truly disappointing part in all this is,

that so many people cannot let go of their pride long enough to apologize for simple misunderstandings.

I once had to swallow very hard and admit fault and apologize to my brother. I could have given all sorts of reasons why I was not in the wrong, but decided if I was completely blameless I would not be in that situation.

So I made no excuses, but apologized for my poor judgment and assured him I would do my best not to repeat my mistakes.

Our relationship changed drastically from that point on. My brother respects me. We do not argue, but are able to discuss our differences kindly and respectfully.

It was a blessing I didn’t expect.

 

[Cinette]

Yes Cinette you did a very good job of explaining.

I agree with you that when someone in the New Testament was given the Holy Spirit it is not always referring to the same thing. One Spirit, yes. But receiving that Spirit can refer to being given different blessing and not necessarily mean everyone has the same power to do something.

Two different questions:
Do you have Scripture to support your explanation?
Do you have catechism support for your explanation?

Everything we Catholics believe can be found in the Catechism. There is a section on Confirmation and another on Baptism. I have a Catechism and refer to it when I need to look up something. Like a Dictionary. I can’t say I have sat down to read the Catechism like the Bible. I go to the Catechism whenever a Protestant asks me a question.LOL

Actually I have just opened it next to me here and I notice there a big section on the Holy Spirit also. I have always said that Protestants keep us on our toes. I am going to have to read that section now as it looks interesting.