V
Vico
Guest
However, even though absolution is given in the individual sacrament of confession, if there is no contrition, then the sin is not forgiven.
- Status
A
annad347
Guest
hmmm… why would he have bothered to only tell the apostles they could forgive sins and not just tell that to everyone?.. now that’s an interesting point.
FYI: I too would like to hear from someone who is Jewish.
Last edited:
W
Wannano
Guest
This is the part I need you to help me understand. If the priest is acting in the place of Christ, it seems logical that he would never make the mistake of granting absolution when in fact it is an error. How can the Catholic leaving the confessional with a granted absolution have the confidence that it is really a word from God and not second guess whether he had true contrition or not?Evan:
However, even though absolution is given in the individual sacrament of confession, if there is no contrition, then the sin is not forgiven.
V
Vico
Guest
Do not confess without first knowing if there is contrition. The contrition does not have to be perfect contrition. There must be regret (sorrow) and the intention not to repeat it (for mortal sins) or of ammendment (for a venial sin). The priest normally asks for an act of contrition. A typical form is:Vico:
This is the part I need you to help me understand. If the priest is acting in the place of Christ, it seems logical that he would never make the mistake of granting absolution when in fact it is an error. How can the Catholic leaving the confessional with a granted absolution have the confidence that it is really a word from God and not second guess whether he had true contrition or not?Evan:
However, even though absolution is given in the individual sacrament of confession, if there is no contrition, then the sin is not forgiven.
Another is:
Catechism
W
Wannano
Guest
What comprises perfect contrition?
W
Wannano
Guest
My answer to your last question is yes. Why would you need to again seek forgiveness from God again via a priest for a sin you have already received forgiveness from God for?
Last edited:
M
mcq72
Guest
Restitution was made under definition of atonement. Are atonement and peneance the same ? I mean it is not called the sacrament of atonement but of penance is it not? Is not part of penance definition have something to do with a punishment (is giving back the money and then some punishment?)?
C
CaptainPrudeman
Guest
How do you know you have received forgiveness from God?
M
mcq72
Guest
So do you know how many things Jesus only told the apostles, and then therefore they are not for laypeople?
A disciple is one who mimics the teacher. God does not just indwell the priest. Jesus is not just in the midst of two or more priests. The priest is not the only one empowered by the baptism in the Holy Ghost. Confessing sins/ faults one to another in James is not just for priests. Priests are not the only ones that can preach the gospel and baptize to signify the actual forgiveness of sins.
The apostles (sent ones) were commissioned to preach the gospel, to make disciples in all nations. The gospel is the good news of appropriating reconciliation to God thru grace and faith in the cleansing and forgiving of sin thru the sacrifice of Jesus.
There is no evidence that as disciples in Christ we do not share in extending this mission. We can all boldly declare that if one confesses their sin to God He is just (by honoring the appropriation of Calvary by faith) to forgive.
It is totally in the prerogative of any church to develop such forgiveness thru a sacrament administered by a
valid church official. It is also a church/community prerogative not to develop such an understanding.
We are all part of the royal priesthood. The days of the OT hiereus priesthood, from the Levite tribe, is over with. That is why NT no longer mentions such an office, but now we have presbyters/bishops, elders and deacons but no more the broader OT hiereus (the unfortunate clouding of the issue is that in English language we translate both presbyter and heireus as “priest” , losing distinction between two testament offices).
Last edited:
M
mcq72
Guest
And how do you trust the priests absolution words if you do not already believe in your heart that God and His Word say so ?
“If we confess our sins, he is faithful and just, to forgive us our sins, and to cleanse us from all iniquity”
“and the blood of Jesus, his Son, purifies us from all sin.”
“Then I acknowledged my sin to you
and did not cover up my iniquity.
I said, “I will confess my transgressions to the Lord.”
And you forgave the guilt of my sin.”
" confess …one to another"
I thought as a Catholic we pre confessionally examined our ourselves, before God, with God, and to God, in faith of His shed blood for reconciliation (forgiveness).I mean by the time you enter the confessional, the battle has already been won. The sacrament was then an acting our of that, but more to aid future holy living by priestly counsel and for the declaring of any penance, like how much prayer time to devote to that end.
It is not explicit in said verses to confess to a priest or to a priest only.
Last edited:
V
Vico
Guest
Last edited:
J
Julius_Caesar
Guest
Penance is restitution.
Every saint had a penance. David lost four sons. Paul experienced the same terror he inflicted on others.
J
Julius_Caesar
Guest
The fact that Jesus was talking to a specific group of people is evidence enough.
J
Julius_Caesar
Guest
Said David, who confessed to God’s representative Nathan.
A
annad347
Guest
weren’t those acts of God? Well except the saints penances, cause I don’t know what they were.
Z
ZemD
Guest
I will have to disagree with you here. As a Catholic, I believe the sacraments were instituted by Christ and are not created at the discretion the church. I also don’t believe Christ intended for his church to splinter into many different churches, each with their own beliefs. But I see that you are not Catholic, so we will have to agree to disagree on that.
I did not intend for this thread to spur a debate. I just wanted the information on the original topic to compare to the Catholic faith, so I don’t wish to debate with anyone on the topic. But if others do on the thread, that is of course fine.
Last edited:
M
mcq72
Guest
Nathan was a prophet and not a priest. He was of the tribe of Judah, not Levi.
Yes, it is a powerful example of confession and atonement, even consequence for sin despite forgiveness. It is also an example of man speaking for God, thru an office, of His forgiveness and judgement.
Yet it would be a stretch to say David confessed to Nathan for Nathan confronted David. That would be like saying Ananias and Sapphira confessed to Peter and the apostles.
And David is specific in verbalizing confessing to God. All things are done primarily before God yet often witnessed by man.
As to an office, we are truly all priests and ambassadors of Christ. It is in this fashion we can confess one to another, not excluding leaders/ elders of the church.
Last edited:
J
Julius_Caesar
Guest
No. We don’t know what tribe he’s from.
“I have sinned against the Lord.”
“The Lord has forgiven thy sin. You shall not die.”
They didn’t. Sapphira lied to Peter.
J
Julius_Caesar
Guest
We all don’t minister to God’s people. The Apostles and Paul did.
W
Wannano
Guest
I know because I believe I have a God that will not renege on His promises.Wannano:
How do you know you have received forgiveness from God?
- Status