Protestants how to you get by without confession

[benhur]

There was no sacrament before Christ. So what?

Not even a foreshadow.

Catholic priests are priests in the order of Melchizedek who offered a sacrifice of bread and wine. The Psalms refer to Jesus as “a priest forever in the order of Melchizedek” (Ps. 110:4) This priesthood, therefore, has never been done away with and cannot be done away with unless Jesus is done away with.

Sorry, Melchizedek offered a meal : “And Melchizedek *king *of Salem brought out bread and wine; now he was a priest of God Most High. And he blessed him and said, “Blessed be Abram of God Most High, Possessor of heaven and earth; and blessed be God Most High, who has delivered your enemies into your hand.” And he gave him a tenth of all.” "Recognizing Abraham’s great deed - winning a victory that the five kings were not able to achieve - he [Melchizedech] sets a feast before Abraham to win the goodwill of so favored a personage."Source: The New Jerome Biblical Commentary“ . As a King He fed Abraham. As a priest, He blessed Abraham…“But you are a chosen race, a royal priesthood,” as per Peter. We (all Christians are like or in order of Melchizedek) are royal because He is King of Salem… Hebrews 7: 27 , “Unlike the other high priests, he does not need to offer sacrifices day after day, first for his own sins, and then for the sins of the people. He sacrificed for their sins once for all when he offered himself. ”Therefore, I urge you, brothers, in view of God’s mercy, to offer your bodies as living sacrifices,…"Romans…We have a sacrifice of praise…The CC priest is acting more after the Levitical, for they request, ask, petition that their offering may be acceptable to God. Quite Mosaic/Levitical but not like Melchizeidek.

 

[QuestLove]

Question for the catholics
If a priest sins, does he have someone he confesses to?

 

[JonNC]

Question for the catholics
If a priest sins, does he have someone he confesses to?

I imagine either another priest, or his bishop. The pope avails himself of confession. Within my Lutheran synod, one pastor in an area acts as a “circuit counselor”, and one of his jobs is the spiritual health of the other pastors in his circuit.

Jon

 

[QuestLove]

I imagine either another priest, or his bishop. The pope avails himself of confession. Within my Lutheran synod, one pastor in an area acts as a “circuit counselor”, and one of his jobs is the spiritual health of the other pastors in his circuit.

Jon

Thanks:thumbsup:
I guess I didn’t realise that the Pope has a confessor as well. Makes sense though.

 

[SteveVH]

Not even a foreshadow.

Both the Passover and the offering of Melchizedek are foreshadows of the Eucharist.

Sorry, Melchizedek offered a meal:

So did Christ and so does a Catholic priest, the same as Melchizedek; bread and wine, now the body and blood of our Lord.

 

[SteveVH]

Question for the catholics
If a priest sins, does he have someone he confesses to?

Jon is correct. The priests confess to each other on a regular basis, at least once a month if not more depending upon the spiritual need. St. Pope John Paul, II confessed almost daily.

 

[EvangelCatholic]

Another difference among Protestants is that private confession is urged but not required unlike the Catholic Church. This is where I have concerns with the idea that a person must go to Church on certain holy days, must go to confession or be at risk for sin.

Luther was uncomfortable with requirements related to Mass and/ or Confession participation. Luther did suggest that a Christian goes to Church/ holy Communion at least 4 times a year or be in danger of grievous sin.

Catholic formulas for what constitutes venial and mortal sins is alien to many Christian, in my opinion.

First Confession is different for Lutherans. Like all sacraments, it is a Gift from God rather than a benchmark for fulfilling a spiritual requirement. Parochial schools are more likely to provide First Confession instruction.

 

[dronald]

Both the Passover and the offering of Melchizedek are foreshadows of the Eucharist.

So did Christ and so does a Catholic priest, the same as Melchizedek; bread and wine, now the body and blood of our Lord.

Sure it does, and Hebrews explains quite well how as you know.

So why don’t you give your interpretation of Hebrews based on the words within?

 

[Isaiah45_9]

Sure it does, and Hebrews explains quite well how as you know.

So why don’t you give your interpretation of Hebrews based on the words within?

Hebrews 7:27 He has no need, like those high priests, to offer sacrifices daily, first for his own sins and then for those of the people; he did this once for all when he offered up himself.

He: Christ. Not us. Christ. He sacrificed himself in blood once. But when He instituted the New Covenant with His blood and His body in place of the Passover meal, He is also presenting Himself in an unbloody sacrifice.

There is therefore an [immolation] (Christ) and an [oblation] (Christ). In that the immolation happened [once and for all] at the Cross, and the oblation happens after the Resurrection.

We need to see this passage in contrast to what the writer of Hebrews says in Chapter 10:

19 Therefore, brethren, since we have confidence to enter the sanctuary by the blood of Jesus, 20 by the new and living way which he opened for us through the curtain, that is, through his flesh, 21 and since we have a great priest over the house of God, 22 let us draw near with a true heart in full assurance of faith, with our hearts sprinkled clean from an evil conscience and our bodies washed with pure water. 23 Let us hold fast the confession of our hope without wavering, for he who promised is faithful; 24 and let us consider how to stir up one another to love and good works, 25 not neglecting to meet together, as is the habit of some, but encouraging one another, and all the more as you see the Day drawing near.

26 For if we sin deliberately after receiving the knowledge of the truth, there no longer remains a sacrifice for sins, 27 but a fearful prospect of judgment, and a fury of fire which will consume the adversaries. 28 A man who has violated the law of Moses dies without mercy at the testimony of two or three witnesses. 29 How much worse punishment do you think will be deserved by the man who has spurned the Son of God, and profaned the blood of the covenant by which he was sanctified, and outraged the Spirit of grace? 30 For we know him who said, “Vengeance is mine, I will repay.” And again, “The Lord will judge his people.” 31 It is a fearful thing to fall into the hands of the living God.

There is no longer a sacrifice for us when we sin after the knowledge of the truth of Christ. It is here that the [oblation] comes in place. The immolation has already happened and it doesn’t need to happen again. But we are sinners and we need to be sanctified continuously.

When we look at verse 29: How much worse punishment do you think will be deserved by the man who has spurned the Son of God, and profaned the blood of the covenant by which he was sanctified, and outraged the Spirit of grace?

This is precisely why we have the Sacrament of Reconciliation.

1 John 1:8 If we say we have no sin, we deceive ourselves, and the truth is not in us. 9 If we confess our sins, he is faithful and just, and will forgive our sins and cleanse us from all unrighteousness. 10 If we say we have not sinned, we make him a liar, and his word is not in us.

Again, our sins make the [oblation] continuously necessary to have life in Christ and escape judgement.

 

[dronald]

Hebrews 7:27 He has no need, like those high priests, to offer sacrifices daily, first for his own sins and then for those of the people; he did this once for all when he offered up himself.

He: Christ. Not us. Christ. He sacrificed himself in blood once. But when He instituted the New Covenant with His blood and His body in place of the Passover meal, He is also presenting Himself in an unbloody sacrifice.

There is therefore an [immolation] (Christ) and an [oblation] (Christ). In that the immolation happened [once and for all] at the Cross, and the oblation happens after the Resurrection.

We need to see this passage in contrast to what the writer of Hebrews says in Chapter 10:

19 Therefore, brethren, since we have confidence to enter the sanctuary by the blood of Jesus, 20 by the new and living way which he opened for us through the curtain, that is, through his flesh, 21 and since we have a great priest over the house of God, 22 let us draw near with a true heart in full assurance of faith, with our hearts sprinkled clean from an evil conscience and our bodies washed with pure water. 23 Let us hold fast the confession of our hope without wavering, for he who promised is faithful; 24 and let us consider how to stir up one another to love and good works, 25 not neglecting to meet together, as is the habit of some, but encouraging one another, and all the more as you see the Day drawing near.

26 For if we sin deliberately after receiving the knowledge of the truth, there no longer remains a sacrifice for sins, 27 but a fearful prospect of judgment, and a fury of fire which will consume the adversaries. 28 A man who has violated the law of Moses dies without mercy at the testimony of two or three witnesses. 29 How much worse punishment do you think will be deserved by the man who has spurned the Son of God, and profaned the blood of the covenant by which he was sanctified, and outraged the Spirit of grace? 30 For we know him who said, “Vengeance is mine, I will repay.” And again, “The Lord will judge his people.” 31 It is a fearful thing to fall into the hands of the living God.

There is no longer a sacrifice for us when we sin after the knowledge of the truth of Christ. It is here that the [oblation] comes in place. The immolation has already happened and it doesn’t need to happen again. But we are sinners and we need to be sanctified continuously.

When we look at verse 29: How much worse punishment do you think will be deserved by the man who has spurned the Son of God, and profaned the blood of the covenant by which he was sanctified, and outraged the Spirit of grace?

This is precisely why we have the Sacrament of Reconciliation.

1 John 1:8 If we say we have no sin, we deceive ourselves, and the truth is not in us. 9 If we confess our sins, he is faithful and just, and will forgive our sins and cleanse us from all unrighteousness. 10 If we say we have not sinned, we make him a liar, and his word is not in us.

Again, our sins make the [oblation] continuously necessary to have life in Christ and escape judgement.

Of course I cannot say that your interpretation of Hebrews 10:26 is speaking of one deliberate sin. If we are speaking of one sin then when we read the verse in light of Hebrews 6:4-6 we can only assume that one deliberate sin would cause one to be unable to be restored.

6:4 For it is impossible, in the case of those who have once been enlightened, who have tasted the heavenly gift, and have shared in the Holy Spirit, 5 and have tasted the goodness of the word of God and the powers of the age to come, 6 and then have fallen away, to restore them again to repentance, since they are crucifying once again the Son of God to their own harm and holding him up to contempt.

Now, assuming one deliberate sin:* “26 For if we sin deliberately after receiving the knowledge of the truth, there no longer remains a sacrifice for sins”* puts us in such a position we can only assume that one deliberate sin means that we cannot be restored. Of course, Scripture is entirely against this concept and it’s obviously not believed by one Christian on this planet.

I certainly believe that someone can become a Christian and fall away, never to be a Christian again. That is; lose Salvation. So I cannot argue as other Protestants might, that one cannot lose Salvation, because the idea seems false to me in light of all Scripture.

So I ask if it’s your contention that the text you quoted is speaking of “one deliberate sin” or if it’s speaking of a continuation of sinning and a rejection of Christ after becoming a Christian.

 

[dronald]

Now, my contention with the Catholic Church in light of Hebrews is how it seems to be speaking out against the priestly services that were used in Judaism and has been replaced by one high priest who no longer needs to maintain the Religious duties that were prevelant in Jewish culture.

Hebrews 7:22 This makes Jesus the guarantor of a better covenant.

23 The former priests were many in number, because they were prevented by death from continuing in office, 24 but he holds his priesthood permanently, because he continues forever. 25 Consequently, he is able to save to the uttermost** those who draw near to God through him, since he always lives to make intercession for them.

26 For it was indeed fitting that we should have such a high priest, holy, innocent, unstained, separated from sinners, and exalted above the heavens. 27 He has no need, like those high priests, to offer sacrifices daily, first for his own sins and then for those of the people, since he did this once for all when he offered up himself. 28 For the law appoints men in their weakness as high priests, but the word of the oath, which came later than the law, appoints a Son who has been made perfect forever

8:3 For every high priest is appointed to offer gifts and sacrifices; thus it is necessary for this priest also to have something to offer. 4 Now if he were on earth, he would not be a priest at all, since there are priests who offer gifts according to the law…13 In speaking of a new covenant, he makes the first one obsolete. And what is becoming obsolete and growing old is ready to vanish away…9:25 Nor was it to offer himself repeatedly, as the high priest enters the holy places every year with blood not his own, 26 for then he would have had to suffer repeatedly since the foundation of the world. But as it is, he has appeared once for all at the end of the ages to put away sin by the sacrifice of himself.

The comparisons just make Catholicism seem so untrue to me. Thanks for your response by the way, I always enjoy our discussions.**

 

[Isaiah45_9]

dronald,

I didn’t say one sin. But repeated what Hebrews says: “If we sin deliberately”. There no longer remains a sacrifice.

What do you think is happening here?

Also,

St. Cyril of Alexandria in his Epistle to Nestorius, says it much better than I can:

Proclaiming the death, according to the flesh, of the Only-begotten Son of God, that is Jesus Christ, confessing his resurrection from the dead, and his ascension into heaven, we offer the Unbloody Sacrifice in the churches, and so go on to the mystical thanksgivings, and are sanctified, having received his Holy Flesh and the Precious Blood of Christ the Saviour of us all. And not as common flesh do we receive it; God forbid: nor as of a man sanctified and associated with the Word according to the unity of worth, or as having a divine indwelling, but as truly the Life-giving and very flesh of the Word himself. For he is the Life according to his nature as God, and when he became united to his Flesh, he made it also to be Life-giving, as also he said to us: Verily, verily, I say unto
you, Except ye eat the flesh of the Son of Man and drink his Blood. For we must not think that it is flesh of a man like us (for how can the flesh of man be life-giving by its own nature?) but as having become truly the very own of him who for us both became and was called Son of Man.

The Didache:

Chapter 14. Christian Assembly on the Lord’s Day

But every Lord’s day gather yourselves together, and break bread, and give thanksgiving after having confessed your transgressions, that your sacrifice may be pure. But let no one that is at variance with his fellow come together with you, until they be reconciled, that your sacrifice may not be profaned. For this is that which was spoken by the Lord: In every place and time offer to me a pure sacrifice; for I am a great King, says the Lord, and my name is wonderful among the nations.

Christ is the only pure sacrifice. In both instances is what the oblation stands for. And we all present this sacrifice when we participate. It’s not just the Priest.

And the Priest stands *in persona Christi *, after and under our High Priest Jesus Christ.

This after the Apostles were delegated to “do this in memory of me”. And the successors of the Apostles carry on this delegation. The various degrees of the priestly order after our High Priest. IOW, Church government and responsibilities.

In this light, today’s Priesthood is the Anti-Type of the Mosaic priesthood.

 

[benhur]

Both the Passover and the offering of Melchizedek are foreshadows of the Eucharist.

Yes, thank you. .We were talking about foreshadow of sacramental confessional.

So did Christ and so does a Catholic priest, the same as Melchizedek; bread and wine, now the body and blood of our Lord.

Some would consider it sacrileges to say communion is a meal for when you are physically hungry. David did not get in trouble because the meal was differentiated from any religious overtones if i am not mistaken. Certainly we are to discern between food strictly for the flesh and that which is spiritual (and for some spiritual and physical food). No CC priest has a sacrificial offering, not just a meal, again if I am not mistaken…

 

[benhur]

dronald,

I didn’t say one sin. But repeated what Hebrews says: “If we sin deliberately”. There no longer remains a sacrifice.

What do you think is happening here?

Also,

St. Cyril of Alexandria in his Epistle to Nestorius, says it much better than I can:

The Didache:

Chapter 14. Christian Assembly on the Lord’s Day

Christ is the only pure sacrifice. In both instances is what the oblation stands for. And we all present this sacrifice when we participate. It’s not just the Priest.

And the Priest stands *in persona Christi *, after and under our High Priest Jesus Christ.

This after the Apostles were delegated to “do this in memory of me”. And the successors of the Apostles carry on this delegation. The various degrees of the priestly order after our High Priest. IOW, Church government and responsibilities.

In this light, today’s Priesthood is the Anti-Type of the Mosaic priesthood.

Again the only problem is the people forget that the offering (Jesus) has already been accepted by the Father making the eucharist a strange remembrance when they say, “May the Lord accept the sacrifice at your hands” in response to the priest saying, “Pray brothers and sisters that our sacrifice may be acceptable to God, the father Almighty .”

 

[Isaiah45_9]

Again the only problem is the people forget that the offering (Jesus) has already been accepted by the Father making the eucharist a strange remembrance when they say, “May the Lord accept the sacrifice at your hands” in response to the priest saying, “Pray brothers and sisters that our sacrifice may be acceptable to God, the father Almighty .”

By this comment I doubt you read my post in regards to the immolation and oblation aspects of Christ’s sacrifice: Post #129

Fundamentals of Catholic Dogma (Ott), The Efficacy of the Sacrifice of the Mass:

a) As the self-sacrifice of Christ, the sacrifice of the Mass works ex opere operato, that is, independently of the moral worthiness of the celebrating priest and of the co-sacrificing faithful. The Council of Trent declared: “This is that clean oblation (Mal. 1:11), which no unworthiness or turpitude of those who offer it can stain.” D 939.

Sources of Catholic Dogma (Denzinger 939-940)

939 And this, indeed, is that “clean oblation” which cannot be defiled by any unworthiness or malice on the part of those who offer it; which the Lord foretold through Malachias must be offered in every place as a clean oblation [Mal. 1:11 ] to His name, which would be great among the gentiles, and which the Apostle Paul writing to the Corinthians has clearly indicated, when he says that they who are defiled by participation of the “table of the devils” cannot become partakers of the table of the Lord 1 Cor. 10:21], understanding by table in each case, the altar. It is finally that [sacrifice] which was prefigured by various types of sacrifices, in the period of nature and the Law Gen. 4:4;8:20;12:8;22; Ex: passim], inasmuch as it comprises all good things signified by them, as being the consummation and perfection of them all.

940 And since in this divine sacrifice, which is celebrated in the Mass, that same Christ is contained and immolated in an unbloody manner, who on the altar of the Cross “once offered Himself” in a bloody manner Heb. 9:27], the holy Synod teaches that this is truly propitiatory [can. 3], and has this effect, that if contrite and penitent we approach God with a sincere heart and right faith, with fear and reverence, “we obtain mercy and find grace in seasonable aid” Heb. 4:16]. For, appeased by this oblation, the Lord, granting the grace and gift of penitence, pardons crimes and even great sins. For, it is one and the same Victim, the same one now offering by the ministry of the priests as He who then offered Himself on the Cross, the manner of offering alone being different. The fruits of that oblation (bloody, that is) are received most abundantly through this unbloody one; so far is the latter from being derogatory in any way to Him [can. 4]. Therefore, it is offered rightly according to the tradition of the apostles [can. 3], not only for the sins of the faithful living, for their punishments and other necessities, but also for the dead in Christ not yet fully purged.

You are also overlooking Hebrews 10
26 For if we sin deliberately after receiving the knowledge of the truth, there no longer remains a sacrifice for sins, 27 but a fearful prospect of judgment, and a fury of fire which will consume the adversaries.

 

[McCartney]

…beginning in Jerusalem’’ Indeed Peter preached that great day in Jerusalem and much reconciliation and forgiveness took place, thru preaching and some say baptism, but no mention of "confessing’’ to apostles. It was however a group “confession” of error, in crucifying the Lord (not believing) and “what would you have us do” they all cried out. Repent (believe) and be baptized for remission of sins…Bottom line, the Lord’s words in John 20 are not ignored on this matter by non-sacramentalists.

John 20:21 - 23, 21 Again Jesus said, “Peace be with you! As the Father has sent me, I am sending you.” 22 And with that he breathed on them and said, “Receive the Holy Spirit. 23 If you forgive anyone’s sins, their sins are forgiven; if you do not forgive them, they are not forgiven

 

[benhur]

By this comment I doubt you read my post in regards to the immolation and oblation aspects of Christ’s sacrifice: Post #129

Fundamentals of Catholic Dogma (Ott), The Efficacy of the Sacrifice of the Mass:

Sources of Catholic Dogma (Denzinger 939-940)

You are also overlooking Hebrews 10
26 For if we sin deliberately after receiving the knowledge of the truth, there no longer remains a sacrifice for sins, 27 but a fearful prospect of judgment, and a fury of fire which will consume the adversaries.

After reading Hebrews I would disagree with your immolate and oblate differences.That we need to confess and continually wash, renew, be filled with the Spirit, ok. But to oblate for sin, not so. It is not a matter of sins beyond baptism or initial Calvary washing, but of conscience. Otherwise in oblation you are just “bringing remembrance unto sins” once more. Like I confessed, and you promise to remember no more under this more merciful new covenant, yet I must later “oblate” for such sins in the Mass ? Mass should be a remembrance of the immolation only. Our oblation is thanksgiving for the immolation, hence “eucharist-thanksgiving”. (Hebrews 10 :3 ,10:18). " Where there is remission of sins there is no more offering for sin" I take that to mean even your oblation… As to vs. 26 sinning willfully and no more sacrifice, the sin is later described as trodding under foot the Son of God, and counting His blood an unholy thing as those that despised. Moses…Again the greatest sin is that blaspheming of the Holy Ghost, against this Spirit of grace, the same Holy Ghost the Lord breathed into the apostles before he told them of binding and loosing sin which I think is thru the good news of this once forever offered Blood, which is the heart of the gospel. Nothing to do with remembrance of sin and a confessional. He is not talking about confessing mortal or venial sins in a confessional…No, Hebrews tells us to maintain the faith, keep the grace, persevere, that indeed His blood does cleanse us (our conscience) despite our imperfections (sin in the old man) yet encourage each other to good works. Do not "draw back’’ to days before you were “illumined”… Of course if you forsake the blood there is nothing under heaven that can help you. Nothing to do with reconciliation, oblation.

 

[benhur]

benhur;12251820:

John 20:21 - 23, 21 Again Jesus said, “Peace be with you! As the Father has sent me, I am sending you.” 22 And with that he breathed on them and said, “Receive the Holy Spirit. 23 If you forgive anyone’s sins, their sins are forgiven; if you do not forgive them, they are not forgiven

Yes but what was the command ? It was to “preach”. Preach what ? Forgiveness of sins. How ? The confessional? No, but by preaching forgiveness of sins by faith in the Blood. Can you deny the simplicity of this, as found when putting all the gospels together dealing with this “sending/commission” ? We must not cafeteria style make out of context dogmas from one verse.

 

[SteveVH]

Yes, thank you. .We were talking about foreshadow of sacramental confessional.

You are so right. Not sure where I drifted off to. Apologies.

As to your “real” question, where would one begin to talk about repentance in the Old Testament. Is confession prefigured in the Old Testament? It is everywhere.

This from Catholic News Agency:

*"Throughout the rest of the Old Testament, God continues to call persons to repent, confess and do penance. It also becomes more ritualized. Through the law of Moses, he gave specific ritual ways for individuals to confess their sins. In Leviticus 5:5-6 we read after a litany of sins, “…whoever is guilty in any of these cases shall confess the sin he has incurred, and as his sin offering for the sin he has committed he shall bring to the Lord a female animal from the flock…The priest shall then make atonement for his sin.” There must be a confession of sin, penance of sacrifice, and the involvement of a priest. It is the priest who makes atonement, which means to remove an obstacle to reconciliation. Leviticus 5:10 goes on to say, “Thus the priest shall make atonement for the sin the man committed, and it will be forgiven.”

We also read in Numbers 5:5-7, “The Lord said to Moses, ‘Tell the Israelites: If a man [or woman] commits a fault against his fellow man and wrongs him, thus breaking faith with the Lord, he shall confess the wrong he has done, restore his ill-gotten goods in full, and in addition give one fifth of their value to the one he has wronged.” There must be a confession and restitution shall be made as a form of penance."*

Some would consider it sacrileges to say communion is a meal for when you are physically hungry. David did not get in trouble because the meal was differentiated from any religious overtones if i am not mistaken. Certainly we are to discern between food strictly for the flesh and that which is spiritual (and for some spiritual and physical food). No CC priest has a sacrificial offering, not just a meal, again if I am not mistaken…

I’m not sure what point you are trying to make. The Eucharist is, in a very real sense, a meal to satisfy our hunger; our spiritual hunger. I doubt anyone mistakes this for a meal to nourish our physical bodies.

The sacrificial offering is the body and blood of the Lord under the appearance of bread and wine. That is what the priest is offering to the Father; the once, for all time, perfect offering, Jesus Christ.

 

[Isaiah45_9]

After reading Hebrews I would disagree with your immolate and oblate differences.That we need to confess and continually wash, renew, be filled with the Spirit, ok. But to oblate for sin, not so. It is not a matter of sins beyond baptism or initial Calvary washing, but of conscience. Otherwise in oblation you are just “bringing remembrance unto sins” once more. Like I confessed, and you promise to remember no more under this more merciful new covenant, yet I must later “oblate” for such sins in the Mass ? Mass should be a remembrance of the immolation only. Our oblation is thanksgiving for the immolation, hence “eucharist-thanksgiving”. (Hebrews 10 :3 ,10:18). " Where there is remission of sins there is no more offering for sin" I take that to mean even your oblation… As to vs. 26 sinning willfully and no more sacrifice, the sin is later described as trodding under foot the Son of God, and counting His blood an unholy thing as those that despised. Moses…Again the greatest sin is that blaspheming of the Holy Ghost, against this Spirit of grace, the same Holy Ghost the Lord breathed into the apostles before he told them of binding and loosing sin which I think is thru the good news of this once forever offered Blood, which is the heart of the gospel. Nothing to do with remembrance of sin and a confessional. He is not talking about confessing mortal or venial sins in a confessional…No, Hebrews tells us to maintain the faith, keep the grace, persevere, that indeed His blood does cleanse us (our conscience) despite our imperfections (sin in the old man) yet encourage each other to good works. Do not "draw back’’ to days before you were “illumined”… Of course if you forsake the blood there is nothing under heaven that can help you. Nothing to do with reconciliation, oblation.

ben,

What is your understanding of:

Hebrews 10:26 For if we sin deliberately after receiving the knowledge of the truth, there no longer remains a sacrifice for sins, 27 but a fearful prospect of judgment, and a fury of fire which will consume the adversaries.