protestants not confessing to a priest

  • Thread starter Thread starter ejp123
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
I think it is because we know that God is everywhere and he knows our hearts. If we pray to Him & repent for our sins and turn away from them, then God has already forgotten them. We don’t feel the need to confess to a priest and be absolved because we can tell God directly, but we still do confess to another to be held accountable for our sins.
If I may ask, you stated at the end of your comment, “But we still do confess to another to be held accountable for our sins”. Who is this “another”? I was once protestant myself and no one I ever knew in my church ever did that, except to Christ in personal prayer. So, how many protestants are confessing their sins to others? this is new to me.
 
I think it is because we know that God is everywhere and he knows our hearts. If we pray to Him & repent for our sins and turn away from them, then God has already forgotten them. We don’t feel the need to confess to a priest and be absolved because we can tell God directly, but we still do confess to another to be held accountable for our sins.
Is it safe to say then that a Protestant only needs to feel regret for a sin in order to be forgiven, or MUST they speak of the sin verbally either during prayer or upon confessing to another…?
 
If I may ask, you stated at the end of your comment, “But we still do confess to another to be held accountable for our sins”. Who is this “another”? I was once protestant myself and no one I ever knew in my church ever did that, except to Christ in personal prayer. So, how many protestants are confessing their sins to others? this is new to me.
What I meant by that was if you are committing a sin over and over again, it is recommended to confess to another Christian in the church. Our church has membership counselors and elders that help members. So you can confess to your membership counselor & they can pray with you & hold you accountable. Of course, you also repent to God in prayer in private as well.
 
Is it safe to say then that a Protestant only needs to feel regret for a sin in order to be forgiven, or MUST they speak of the sin verbally either during prayer or upon confessing to another…?
If you are confessing it to another, then, yes you need to say it out loud. The elders & membership counselors have heard it all and want to help. It is not necessary as far as I know to say the sin out loud while repenting in private with God, but it can help, I imagine . If you say a general prayer, ‘I repent for my sins’ then God knows the sin even if you don’t say it out loud. Also, if you pray in the Holy Spirit, God is also reading your heart & knows if you are truly repentent. You don’t have to feel regret to repent. You should do so regardless of fickle feelings. But for most people with really heavy sins, guilt and regret are the main things that lead to repentance.
 
Is it true once a non-Catholic is baptized he is given grace enough to be saved, but once he commits a mortal sin he cannot be forgiven outside of the R.Catholic church ?
 
My sister left the Church years ago and began attending a People’s Church where they are charismatic, were on fire for the Lord, and did alot of groupie things.

They wanted to do face to face confession in her group. She always spoke of this young couple who helped her relate to Scripture. But during the confessional, the husband confessed to my sister that he was attracted to her, etc., and it destroyed the friendship.

Just as we are exhorted not to let anyone lay hands on us, the same goes for confessing our sins to another.

I find lay people very amateur, and can see another person’s cross that is leading them to heaven – be it a spouse, offspring, hardship – as scandal…(the scandal of the Cross)…and the ‘confessor’ even begin to gossip and hold the person set and locked in the image he/she inadvertently created when having another person confide in them.

This is a set up for abuse and is what recently happened in the Mars Hill groupie confession, where group dynamics came over with a penitent.

In our RCIA class, an inquiring Protestant asked the pastor about when Christ said not to call anyone father but the Father in heaven. He said it was in context of tribalism in those times…that we are not to be clannish and divisive, but instead to see God as our Heavenly Father. And, the Lord does in other places, as when encountering the rich young man…how it has been said that we are to honor our mother and father…

A priest is the father of our souls, He provides us the Bread of Life, the Eucharist that provides us eternal life, the priest stands in place of the Lord, His minister Who forgives our sins through the priest.

We see the priest as indeed encompassing and extending the role of the Heavenly Father. I came from my parents through the creative force of God, but God the Father gave me my soul.

The priest extends the work of God the Father for our souls, and through the universal church, nurtures and guides us…in the Church as Mother. And the priest is professional.

If a priest reveals anything from confession regarding sin, he is automatically excommunicated. In the Mars Hill Church, the penitent was excommunicated.

To look down on our going to confession is certainly not anything to feel smug about, especially considering a layperson’s inability to be declined the power and authority to forgive sins in the Lord’s name, and not be able to allow the presence of Christ come to us at the end of absolution.

Confession is all outside your experience. You don’t know about it except what your preachers work so hard at… to keep you away from the Lord, His sacraments, and your participation in His Church.
 
In response to the Protestant question, those who commit serious sin…then if they do not go to confession, they are condemned to hell?

Only if they refuse to repent. I know of non-Catholics who have gone into confess or to unload.

It is our sincere repentance in union with God that brings us forgiveness – depending on our state in life. The Church does not take the action of condemning anyone to hell, as Christ came to save us, not to condemn us.

The condition is to receive Holy Communion/Eucharist, one must be free of all serious, mortal, grave sins…those that deliberately committed against the 10 commandments, with full knowledge of their offense God. If a Catholic receives Holy Communion in mortal sin, they have sinned again another serious one – the sin of sacrilege.

The Eucharist is now in the place of God’s presence on the Mercy Seat…the Old Temple of Jerusalem that was torn down and attempted to rebuilt 3 times.

The Eucharistic Lord is now God’s physical presence in the world. In ancient times, only the one High Priest was allowed into the Holy of Holies inner sanctuary…and that was once a year, to sprinkle blood of the sacrificial lamb for the people’s sin and to reveal the forthcoming Covenant of the Blood of the Sacrificial Lamb, Jesus Christ.

So to Receive the Eucharist, the Manna from Heaven, the Holy of all Holies, is a grave sacrilege. One must be free of serious sin, and that can only happen in the confessional for a believer.

For the Protestant, yes, they are missing out on the sacramental life and a mystological and universal relationship and perspective…but we always must always place every person in God’s mercy.
 
If you are confessing it to another, then, yes you need to say it out loud. The elders & membership counselors have heard it all and want to help. It is not necessary as far as I know to say the sin out loud while repenting in private with God, but it can help, I imagine . If you say a general prayer, ‘I repent for my sins’ then God knows the sin even if you don’t say it out loud. Also, if you pray in the Holy Spirit, God is also reading your heart & knows if you are truly repentent. You don’t have to feel regret to repent. You should do so regardless of fickle feelings. But for most people with really heavy sins, guilt and regret are the main things that lead to repentance.
So, let me ask…you have not gone to the elders and membership counselors yourself?

If not, then how can you say…but it can help, I imagine…so you are not sure?

In the sacrament of confession…there is a sureness.

Actually, there is an example of someone where God asked him and her to directly confess their sin but the result was disastrous.

Here it is, from Genesis 3:

8 Then the man and his wife heard the sound of the LORD God as he was walking in the garden in the cool of the day, and they hid from the LORD God among the trees of the garden. 9 But the LORD God called to the man, “Where are you?”

10 He answered, “I heard you in the garden, and I was afraid because I was naked; so I hid.”

11 And he said, “Who told you that you were naked? Have you eaten from the tree that I commanded you not to eat from?”

12 The man said, “The woman you put here with me—she gave me some fruit from the tree, and I ate it.”

13 Then the LORD God said to the woman, “What is this you have done?”

The woman said, “The serpent deceived me, and I ate.”

From verse 11, God knew Adam had sinned, so here he asks the question and is actually asking Adam to confess what he had done. And verse 12 is Adam’s response…and his response actually makes the sin worse, he blames another, Eve, for him being disobedient. So instead of owning to his sin, or admitting the sin (confessing) which God was looking for, he blames another. So the result is disastrous.

Same with the Eve…when God asks Eve in v13, God knows Eve has sinned, God is asking Eve to own up to her disobedience. And you can see Eve’s response…she blames the serpent. So, another disastrous response.

From the examples cited above, you can see the when you go directly to God, there is a lot of rationalization, of second guessing, whether we sinned or not.

But with the sacrament, there is no rationalization. When one goes to the confessional, there is an admission of guilt, we accuse ourselves that we have sinned. Then we now have to find the courage to go to confession, and orally account to the priest, who represents Christ, our sins. There is no ifs and buts, but a straight accounting of our transgressions and our admittance of guilt. Then when the priest says the absolution, there is relief in knowing that our sins have been forgiven.
 
Why must confession be in private? If one want’s to move on and stop sinning as much, wouldn’t it be better to have morale support by telling sins in public or to a small group?
 
There is no reason to confess to anyone but God. Although if we have hurt another person, we need to go to that person and ask for forgiveness.

The scriptures don’t say anything about confessing our sins to another human being. I love going to the Father many, many times a day. What a blessing!
 
There is no reason to confess to anyone but God. Although if we have hurt another person, we need to go to that person and ask for forgiveness.

The scriptures don’t say anything about confessing our sins to another human being. I love going to the Father many, many times a day. What a blessing!
Okay…can you explain what is David saying to Nathan here, and what is Nathan saying in return:

2Sam12:

13 Then David said to Nathan, “I have sinned against the Lord.”

Nathan replied, “The Lord has taken away your sin. You are not going to die. 14 But because by doing this you have shown utter contempt for[a] the Lord, the son born to you will die.”

Or in 1Sam 15, why is Saul asking for Samuel’s forgiveness and not the Lord’s also:

24 Then Saul said to Samuel, “I have sinned. I violated the Lord’s command and your instructions. I was afraid of the men and so I gave in to them. 25 Now I beg you, forgive my sin and come back with me, so that I may worship the Lord.”

Or here in Job 42, why did God not just forgive Eliphaz, but directed them to go through Job?

7 After the Lord had said these things to Job , he said to Eliphaz the Temanite, “I am angry with you and your two friends, because you have not spoken the truth about me, as my servant Job has. 8 So now take seven bulls and seven rams and go to my servant Job and sacrifice a burnt offering for yourselves. My servant Job will pray for you, and I will accept his prayer and not deal with you according to your folly. You have not spoken the truth about me, as my servant Job has.” 9 So Eliphaz the Temanite, Bildad the Shuhite and Zophar the Naamathite did what the Lord told them; and the Lord accepted Job’s prayer.
 
Huh??? I don’t see the connection with the story of David and Nathan. What am I missing. David was a murderer and an adulterer, but he knew how to repent. There are entire Psalms that show his grieving because of his sinful behavior. And… David went right to the Lord.

I would like to understand what you are trying to say. Can you please try again?
 
Again Grace…you are not following the directives of the Risen Lord. He consecrated His apostles in Spirit and Truth.

The resurrection is the greatest act in human history. And it was on the evening of the Resurrection that Our Lord appeared to His apostles and gave them…and of course their disciples…the power to forgive and absolve sin…in Him.

It is Christ Himself Who absolves our sin, not the priest. It is Christ Himself Who is the Body, Blood, Soul, and Divinity in the Eucharist…this faith unchanged for 2,000 years.

Again, you have to see how truthful your leaders are in teaching you the verifiable practice of our worship, our perspective on Holy Orders…they are misrepresenting our faith to you. You can only explain in so many words here.

The other problem is understanding the nature and mission of the Church. Our entire life of the Church does not come from the Virgin Mary. Our life in the Church is Jesus Christ. He is our center, our focus. His ministers are visible to us…but we recognize Christ’s presence in them, and it is the Lord we focus on. The Pope is not some god man as I saw him described on this anti-Catholic site.

It is good you are here…But you need to pray to the Holy Spirit to lead you to the truth, and ask Him to help you be rid of any misrepresentation of our faith. The more I am on CAF, the more I can see how fundamentalist leaders avoid the actual teachings of the Church on our worship of Christ, and proper prospective.
 
Kathleen, I appreciate your response, but I’m not sure what you are trying to tell me. If you are basing your answer on the idea that everything the Catholic church teaches because of Matthew 16:18, then you are falling on deaf ears, because I don’t believe it. I believe it was Peter’s answer that the faith is based on. So, aside from that, where do the scriptures teach that I need to confess to a priest?

I don’t mind having a fair conversation regarding where we have differences, but Im sure you know I hold to sola scriptura. I have never made that a secret.

I do learn things when I come here and most people are very nice. Others purposely look for ways to insult which I found today. It was quite upsetting.

I accept that the primary difference may make the conversation impossible and that’s okay, but I answered the question as it was given. If Catholics don’t really want to know, then why ask?
 
There is no reason to confess to anyone but God. Although if we have hurt another person, we need to go to that person and ask for forgiveness.

The scriptures don’t say anything about confessing our sins to another human being. I love going to the Father many, many times a day. What a blessing!
If there is no reason to confess to anyone but God then why did Christ give the Church the authority to forgive sins:

“Peace be with you. As the Father has sent me, so I send you.” And when he had said this, he breathed on them and said to them, “Receive the holy Spirit. Whose sins you forgive are forgiven them, and whose sins you retain are retained.” (John 20:21-23)

Why would Jesus have said this if he didn’t mean it? And if he meant it then should we not accept what he said? Christ had the authority to forgive sins and gave that authority to his Apostles and their successors.
 
“Peace be with you. As the Father has sent me, so I send you.” And when he had said this, he breathed on them and said to them, “Receive the holy Spirit. Whose sins you forgive are forgiven them, and whose sins you retain are retained.” (John 20:21-23)
As I understand it, the Lutheran understudying of this is that the Church can announce and proclaim God’s forgiveness, but that it’s ultimately it is God who is doing the forgiving.
 
As I understand it, the Lutheran understudying of this is that the Church can announce and proclaim God’s forgiveness, but that it’s ultimately it is God who is doing the forgiving.
Yes, of course it is God who is doing the forgiving. But he gave the Church the authority to act on his behalf. The priest does not forgive someone with his own authority, but rather with Christ’s authority. He acts in the person of Christ. And what the priest does is binding both on earth and in heaven. “Whatever you bind on earth will be bound in heaven and whatever you loose on earth will be loosed in heaven.” This is incredible authority but we must remember that it is given to Christ’s own Church, of which He is the Head and which is guided by the Holy Spirit. The sacrament of Reconciliation is much more than just an announcement or a proclamation. It actually has an effect upon the soul and accomplishes what it signifies; the cleansing of our souls. And yes, it is God, not the priest, who cleanses our soul.
 
If there is no reason to confess to anyone but God then why did Christ give the Church the authority to forgive sins:

“Peace be with you. As the Father has sent me, so I send you.” And when he had said this, he breathed on them and said to them, “Receive the holy Spirit. Whose sins you forgive are forgiven them, and whose sins you retain are retained.” (John 20:21-23)

Why would Jesus have said this if he didn’t mean it? And if he meant it then should we not accept what he said? Christ had the authority to forgive sins and gave that authority to his Apostles and their successors.
I love this part of scripture. Thanks for posting it.

The expressions they are forgiven and it is witheld both represent perfect tense verbs in Greek and could also be translated “they have been forgiven” and “it has been witheld” since the perfect gives the sense of completed action with continuing results in the present. The idea is not that individual Christians or churches have authority on their own to forgive or not forgive people, but rather that as the church proclaims the gospel message of forgivenessof sins in the power of the Holy Spirit, it proclaims that those who believe in Jesus have their sins forgiven, and those that do not believe in him do not have their sins forgiven, which simply reflects what God in Heaven has already done. See Matt 16:19.
 
I love this part of scripture. Thanks for posting it.

The expressions they are forgiven and it is witheld both represent perfect tense verbs in Greek and could also be translated “they have been forgiven” and “it has been witheld” since the perfect gives the sense of completed action with continuing results in the present. The idea is not that individual Christians or churches have authority on their own to forgive or not forgive people, but rather that as the church proclaims the gospel message of forgivenessof sins in the power of the Holy Spirit, it proclaims that those who believe in Jesus have their sins forgiven, and those that do not believe in him do not have their sins forgiven, which simply reflects what God in Heaven has already done. See Matt 16:19.
I don’t see how your translation changes anything. If we agree that “they have been forgiven” is accurate, the forgiveness still does not take place until the sinns have been forgiven by those to whom Christ gave that authority and who act in and through that authority. God has not already forgiven our sins. They are not forgiven until we ask for and receive that forgiveness. This is true even if you believe that you can obtain this without the aid of the sacrament (which, by the way, we also believe, provided one has perfect contrition for one’s sins or intends to confess but is prevented through no fault of his own.) I think you may be confusing “redemption” with “forgiveness”. There’s a big difference. Christ’s redemption was done once, for all men, yet not all men are forgiven, nor are all men saved. So obtaining forgiveness does not simply relfect what God has done. Redemption reflects what God has done. He has made it possible, through his redemptive sacrifice, for men to enter into heaven and he has given us the means to obtain forgiveness through his presence in the sacrament which is administered by the one who posesses the authority given by Christ himself, the priest.

Your reference to Matt 16:19 only makes my argument stronger. The words are very clear. He gave Peter and his successors the keys to the kingdom of heaven (authority)together with the power to bind and loose. I would urge you to read these words again and ask yourself why he said this. I realize that you, as we all do, will approach this with your preconceived notion of what it must mean in order to square with what you have chosen to believe. But there is nothing ambiguous about Jesus’ words. He said them for a reason. Keep in mind also what he did and said before he gave the Apostles the power to forgive sins. “As the Father has sent me, so I send you.” God the Father sent Christ to us for many reasons, one of which was to forgive our sins, so Christ sends the Apostles and their successors just as he was sent. Then, before he gives them this authority, God the Son, “breathes” on the Apostles. The only other moment in Holy Scripture where God breathes on mankind is in Genesis 2:7, when the Lord “breathes” divine life into man. Something significant is taking place. Only then Jesus says, “Receive the holy Spirit. Whose sins you forgive are forgiven them, and whose sins you retain are retained.”

God bless.
 
Huh??? I don’t see the connection with the story of David and Nathan. What am I missing. David was a murderer and an adulterer, but he knew how to repent. There are entire Psalms that show his grieving because of his sinful behavior. And… David went right to the Lord.

I would like to understand what you are trying to say. Can you please try again?
Then I hope you find time to read this: calledtocommunion.com/2009/07/ecclesial-deism/

From which I will cite from the article(substitute your name for Mohler):

‘Tradition’ becomes whatever one agrees with in the history of the Church, such as the Nicene Creed or Chalcedonian Christology.

This pick-and-choose approach to the tradition shows that it is not the fact that an Ecumenical Council declared something definitively that makes it ‘authoritative’ for Mohler. What makes it ‘authoritative’ for Mohler is that it agrees with his interpretation of Scripture. If he encounters something in the tradition that seems extra-biblical or opposed to Scripture he rejects it. For that reason, tradition does not authoritatively guide his interpretation. His interpretation picks out what counts as tradition, and then this tradition informs his interpretation.

You said this… I don’t see the connection with the story of David and Nathan. What am I missing…I would say the reason you do not see the connection is because what you have been taught…the tradition you come from…has not taught you…or your ‘teaching tradition’ comes from a denial of catholic teaching.

Okay…first…you stated this in a previous post…*The scriptures don’t say anything about confessing our sins to another human being. I love going to the Father many, many times a day. What a blessing!
*

So let me ask…when David said the following…"
13 Then David said to Nathan, “I have sinned against the Lord.”…Is he not confessing here?

And what is Nathan doing when he said this…"Nathan replied, “The Lord has taken away your sin. You are not going to die. 14 But because by doing this you have shown utter contempt for[a] the Lord, the son born to you will die.”…is Nathan not pronouncing the absolution of David’s sin, via authority from God?
David was a murderer and an adulterer, but he knew how to repent. There are entire Psalms that show his grieving because of his sinful behavior. And… David went right to the Lord.
Look at this verse again…
2Sam12:

13 Then David said to Nathan, “I have sinned against the Lord.”

Okay…let me ask…when did David realize he had sinned? When did he repent? Was it prior to Nathan speaking to him or after?

When did he knew how to repent? Read on…Here is the opening of Chapter 12:

The Lord sent Nathan to David. When he came to him, he said, “There were two men in a certain town, one rich and the other poor. …5 David burned with anger against the man and said to Nathan, “As surely as the Lord lives, the man who did this must die! 6 He must pay for that lamb four times over, because he did such a thing and had no pity.”

7 Then Nathan said to David, “You are the man!

So…let me repeat…when did David realized he had sinned? Prior to the event of Chapter 12 or before?
There are entire Psalms that show his grieving because of his sinful behavior. And… David went right to the Lord.
Are you talking about Psalm 51…so let me ask…did David write this psalm after or before Nathan came to him, and made him realize the gravity of his sin? And he learned of the consequences of his sin?

Reading on…
14 But because by doing this you have shown utter contempt for[a] the Lord, the son born to you will die.”

15 After Nathan had gone home, the Lord struck the child that Uriah’s wife had borne to David, and he became ill. 16 David pleaded with God for the child. He fasted and spent the nights lying in sackcloth** on the ground. 17 The elders of his household stood beside him to get him up from the ground, but he refused, and he would not eat any food with them.

So let me ask some more…when did David start showing repentance…pleaded for the child…and fasted and spent nights lying in sackcloth?

Was it before Nathan came to him or after? Can you see any Bible passages of David doing any pleading for forgiveness, showing any remorse…prior to Nathan’s pronouncement in verse 13?**
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top