What are Protestant concerns with the sacrament of confession?

[dessert]

I know people like that as well. God bless their hunger. Paul pointed out that there is room for charity when it comes to how we practice our faith. For some people, drinking is a “sin” while others have no problems with spirits etc… I think the most important thing is having a mutual respect and charity for what works for each other and not look down on those who are different. If I had the time, I might go to mass more than once a week.

Something a deacon said to me recently put it in perspective when speaking of the sacrament of priestly orders. He said we are all members of the priesthood of believers. Our homes are as much a part of the church as the parish building. In our homes, we function as priests. We break bread, we minister, we do many of the same functions that the church does but to our families, friends and to those who come to our door. I never thought of my daily boring home life that way. It made me start questioning what goes on in my house or what doesn’t.

Yes the person I am thinking of even if she is angry she feels she has to go confess that. I sometime wonder what her thought process is like but also have concluded this is her relationship with the Lord not mine but I’m not happy when they tell me I have to do things the way her and others are. So I am not trying to look down on her and I have concluded that she is worried that my relaxed version is not so healthy for her. I keep my distance which leads her to think I am ignoring her. Oh well you can’t win them all.
return from the desert

 

[LadyFlynt]

A couple of protests on the practice would be (more of concerns)

1. we can confess to eachother, no where is it stated in scripture that it has to be a priest
2. the abuse of authority…there are those that have in history and currently today that can and have abused their authority by using information gathered during a confession.
3. we don’t see it as a means of Grace (forgiveness coming from one that is neither God nor a person involved in the event, ie sinned against)

 

[FromTheCrossroa]

The Catholic Church is always ready and waiting for it’s separated brethren with open arms .

God Bless,
Maria

Thanks! Believe you-me, one of the primary reasons I chose to join the Catholic church is in response to what I’ve noticed as a shift in non-denominational churches (especially in my area) to water down the gospel into happy go-lucky secular psychology with a hint of gospel truth. I can’t speak for all non-Catholic churches just for the ones I visited. It helped that my wife is Catholic but had I wandered into the parish I now belong to, I would have made that decision anyways. The people in my parish get credit for showing me the Catholic faith in ways others failed including my wonderfully devout and compassionate mother-in-law. I long for the day when we can take the big “C” off catholic and be reconciled to the little “c”'s as hoped for in Vatican II. But that will not only take more steps on the protestant side, but also (as in the parable of the prodigal son) require more steps on the Catholic side. The only downside I can think of is although I will unite my family under one church, I can’t bring my non-Catholic members to my church and be comfortable as they aren’t welcome at the table of the Eucharist. My heart has softened from being very hurt by this perceived insult to my faith but still this will remain a sore spot for me for a long time to come. Bringing it back to the topic…To this day, I understand the why. I still feel it unnecessary and divisive when we the church should be taking more steps to be one in Christ.

 

[jmcrae]

I don’t know about you, but if I had to confess every sin I can think of to a priest, I think he would tell me he has other people he needs to serve and to sin no more.

There is only a maximum possible of ten. The priest doesn’t need a lot of details. Just tell him which ones you did, and how many times each.

 

[MariaG]

Thanks! Believe you-me, one of the primary reasons I chose to join the Catholic church is in response to what I’ve noticed as a shift in non-denominational churches (especially in my area) to water down the gospel into happy go-lucky secular psychology with a hint of gospel truth. I can’t speak for all non-Catholic churches just for the ones I visited. It helped that my wife is Catholic but had I wandered into the parish I now belong to, I would have made that decision anyways. The people in my parish get credit for showing me the Catholic faith in ways others failed including my wonderfully devout and compassionate mother-in-law. I long for the day when we can take the big “C” off catholic and be reconciled to the little “c”'s as hoped for in Vatican II. But that will not only take more steps on the protestant side, but also (as in the parable of the prodigal son) require more steps on the Catholic side. The only downside I can think of is although I will unite my family under one church, I can’t bring my non-Catholic members to my church and be comfortable as they aren’t welcome at the table of the Eucharist. My heart has softened from being very hurt by this perceived insult to my faith but still this will remain a sore spot for me for a long time to come. Bringing it back to the topic…To this day, I understand the why. I still feel it unnecessary and divisive when we the church should be taking more steps to be one in Christ.

Yet the very thing that attracts you, the non-watered down version, is what you also seem to have a problem with?

The Catholic Church has always held a closed communion. One had to become a Catholic Christian to recieve in the Church. The rules remain the same today.

When one participates in communion in the Catholic Church, we are saying that “We beleive”. Unless someone chooses to become Catholic, we fear that they may not truly understand, (otherwise they would become Catholic and become formally united with the One body of Christ ). As such, we cannot allow them to recieve the body of Christ unworthily.

So respectfully, it would seem that just as in marriage, the very thing that first attracts us to our spouse, can frequently be the thing that irritates us later on. This seems to be similar to your stated relationship and problems with the Catholic Church?

Maybe I am wrong. That is a frequent occurance

God bless,
Maria

 

[jmcrae]

A couple of protests on the practice would be (more of concerns)

1. we can confess to each other, no where is it stated in scripture that it has to be a priest.

No, but the earliest practice of the Church shows that the priest was present - in private Confession, they confessed directly to him, and received the Absolution from him. In public confessions (which are not currently in use) the priest was present with the congregation, and it was the priest who gave the absolution at that time, too - not the congregation.

1. the abuse of authority…there are those that have in history and currently today that can and have abused their authority by using information gathered during a confession.

Do you know of a specific example? I am under the impression that no Catholic priest has ever violated the seal of the Confessional, in all of 2,000 years. (He would be immediately excommunicated, if he ever did.)

1. we don’t see it as a means of Grace (forgiveness coming from one that is neither God nor a person involved in the event, ie sinned against)

And that means, what, to us? We believe that it is a Sacrament instituted by Jesus Christ, and we find evidence for this in the Scriptures, particularly John 2:19-23 (where Christ confers His powers of forgiveness on to the Apostles), II Corinthians 5:17-20 (which identifies the Sacrament of Reconciliation as a core ministry of the Church), James 5:13-16 (in which the priests of the Church are called to hear the Confession of the sick person in the Sacrament of Anointing).

In John 20:21, Jesus tells the Apostles, “As the Father has sent Me, (Jesus received equal authority with the Father) so also (meaning, in the same way) I send you.” (The Apostles now have equal authority with Christ.)

 

[dessert]

We are going to have a communal confession on the 9th. Guess who is hosting this US, so who out there can tell me what to expect? i think I read someone had one but didn’t say what it was like. I will let you know how it gooes or doesn’t if anyone shows up. All four churches are invited.
return

 

[jmcrae]

We are going to have a communal confession on the 9th. Guess who is hosting this US, so who out there can tell me what to expect?

Prayers and singing, followed by individual confessions with the priests.

You will participate in praying the Act of Contrition all together at some point during the service, and you will also hear an Examination of Conscience read out, along with encouragement to go to Confession to one of the available priests.

After the praying and singing is done, the priests will go to the Confessionals and start hearing Confessions. If there aren’t enough Confessionals for all the priests, some of them will set up with chairs and portable screens in various corners of the Church.

 

[MariaG]

1. we don’t see it as a means of Grace (forgiveness coming from one that is neither God nor a person involved in the event, ie sinned against)

The grace IS coming from God.

do you not believe Scripture in which God healed people through the apostles? I do not believe you are claiming that the grace originated in the apostles, but it certainly flowed from them.

The Sacrament of confession is healing of the soul. The grace is from God.

Scripture is filled with examples of how God chooses to heal man through other people and even through objects. Why do you think the healing of the soul would be any different. God doesn’t change.

Straight from the Catechism of the Catholic Church

**

Only God forgives sin

[1441](javascriptpenWindow(‘cr/1441.htm’) Only God forgives sins.39 Since he is the Son of God, Jesus says of himself, “The Son of man has authority on earth to forgive sins” and exercises this divine power: "Your sins are forgiven."40 Further, by virtue of his divine authority he gives this power to men to exercise in his name.41 [1442](javascriptpenWindow(‘cr/1442.htm’) Christ has willed that in her prayer and life and action his whole Church should be the sign and instrument of the forgiveness and reconciliation that he acquired for us at the price of his blood. But he entrusted the exercise of the power of absolution to the apostolic ministry which he charged with the "ministry of reconciliation."42 The apostle is sent out “on behalf of Christ” with “God making his appeal” through him and pleading: "Be reconciled to God."43

I also put the footnote references in below. If you’ll notice, every single one references staight from scripture. Confession is so scriptural that is makes me weep for those unable to see this glorious truth and pray that the Holy Spirit will reveal this truth to them.

39 Cf. Mk 2:7.
40 Mk 2:5,10; Lk 7:48.
41 Cf. Jn 20:21-23.
42 2 Cor 5:18.
43 2 Cor 5:20.

**God Bless,Maria

 

[FromTheCrossroa]

Yet the very thing that attracts you, the non-watered down version, is what you also seem to have a problem with?

The Catholic Church has always held a closed communion. One had to become a Catholic Christian to recieve in the Church. The rules remain the same today.

When one participates in communion in the Catholic Church, we are saying that “We beleive”. Unless someone chooses to become Catholic, we fear that they may not truly understand, (otherwise they would become Catholic and become formally united with the One body of Christ ). As such, we cannot allow them to recieve the body of Christ unworthily.

So respectfully, it would seem that just as in marriage, the very thing that first attracts us to our spouse, can frequently be the thing that irritates us later on. This seems to be similar to your stated relationship and problems with the Catholic Church?

Maybe I am wrong. That is a frequent occurance

God bless,
Maria

I’d think marriage gets better as you get into a deeper relationship with a person, or at least thats been my experience with my wife.

Here is what I believe (about me):

I know in my heart of hearts that I have been saved by the blood of Christ. I know that my faith (albeit imperfect) combined with Christ’s grace and mercy justifies me and completes me in areas where I am lacking. I also know I can reason and profess solidarity with any Christian in reciting the nicean creed. I know when I go to mass, I am in a clean state.

The problem I have with non-denominational churches is that they are lacking in sound teaching, not that they are incapable of extending grace. I believe some churches misuse grace to accept anything. This is why I came to the Catholic church. However, one of the shortcomings I see in the Catholic church is not enough grace is extended to members of Christs family. I understand the reasons, the history, traditions, etc for the practice. I see it as one of the areas in which the Church should consider taking steps to reform and or reconcile with other Christians.

Let me illustrate:

Last week was Thanksgiving. The Eucherist literally means thanksgiving. I prepared a rather large and expansive feast in my home. I had members of my family come that do not live in my home. I embraced them as family even if they were only friends. When the time came, the meal was presented. Everyone lined up at the table and ate their fill. I didn’t exclude anyone invited into my home from taking part in the meal of thanksgiving. I know some of my guests had no idea the many hours I labored to present the meal. No one chipped in on the cost. I did not ask those who came with the right heart and reasons to sit in the living room while only my wife, child and myself consumed the meal as the only ones truly deserving to eat in my house. I extended the meal to all just as Christ did on passover.

I believe this to be the true example of how we should conduct ourselves in the celebration of the Eucherist. Even Judas Iscariot was given communion in one gospel account. I am not suggesting that those in an unclean state or those who can not profess solidarity in the creed as Christ did not invite the sanhedrin for the supper. I believe only that for members of our family (as non Catholic Christians are considered by Vatican II) should be afforded grace and allowed to worship and participate accordingly. Likewise, for other denominations that practice the same stingyness in the Lord’s Supper should reform their practice in the same manner. I see no reason that if the Pope can bind and loose as the Holy Spirit directs that communion can not be loosed as a courtesy to all Christians willing to profess their faith in worship to God and celebrate thanksgiving with Christ.

 

[MariaG]

I’d think marriage gets better as you get into a deeper relationship with a person, or at least thats been my experience with my wife.

Oh yes, I agree with you too. But there is also a point in most peoples relationship (usually in the early stages) where the things that attract one, also bother one. One has to move past this stage in order to reach a deeper and more mature love.

Here is what I believe (about me):

I know in my heart of hearts that I have been saved by the blood of Christ. I know that my faith (albeit imperfect) combined with Christ’s grace and mercy justifies me and completes me in areas where I am lacking. I also know I can reason and profess solidarity with any Christian in reciting the nicean creed. I know when I go to mass, I am in a clean state.

Awesome:thumbsup:

The problem I have with non-denominational churches is that they are lacking in sound teaching, not that they are incapable of extending grace. I believe some churches misuse grace to accept anything. This is why I came to the Catholic church.

I agree with you here. They do not have the fullness of truth, but that does not mean that they are incapable of true and miraculous events of God’s grace. They are our brothers and sisters in Christ.

However, one of the shortcomings I see in the Catholic church is not enough grace is extended to members of Christs family. I understand the reasons, the history, traditions, etc for the practice. I see it as one of the areas in which the Church should consider taking steps to reform and or reconcile with other Christians.

Let me illustrate: (edited for space refer to original post for full text)

… I extended the meal to all just as Christ did on passover.

I believe this to be the true example of how we should conduct ourselves in the celebration of the Eucherist. Even Judas Iscariot was given communion in one gospel account. I am not suggesting that those in an unclean state or those who can not profess solidarity in the creed as Christ did not invite the sanhedrin for the supper. I believe only that for members of our family (as non Catholic Christians are considered by Vatican II) should be afforded grace and allowed to worship and participate accordingly. Likewise, for other denominations that practice the same stingyness in the Lord’s Supper should reform their practice in the same manner. I see no reason that if the Pope can bind and loose as the Holy Spirit directs that communion can not be loosed as a courtesy to all Christians willing to profess their faith in worship to God and celebrate thanksgiving with Christ.

Respectfully, I disagree with you. We can see in the Early Church that unless one professed “all” that the Church believes, one was barred from full communion. That does not mean that when one could not be admitted or readmitted into communion with the Church, but historically, we can see that today the Church actually deals very softly with separated believers in Christ.

I know that before I came back (actually came to even though I was a technical cradle Catholic, long story but I am more of a convert than a revert ), I sat in a pew, convicted by the Holy Spirit, with tears running down my face because I had just realized I could not recieve communion with my Evangelical brothers and sisters in Christ because they did not believe in the Real Presence.

It was not just that I saw no meaning in recieving, I was convicted by the Spirit that I COULD NOT recieve with my brothers and sisters in Christ because we did not have the same beliefs. Not because they were not Christians. Not because they were wrong and I was right. But because I was convicted that it was wrong because our beliefs were no longer the same (Real Presence).

Now, there are times that I wonder if it is not okay IF those we were to recieve with professed a belief in the Real Presence if it were okay. But then I realize that I actually do see the wisdom of the Church and its rules.

We see over and over the exhortation to “be one body”. If the rules were changed and anyone could recieve in the Catholic Church, what reason would anyone have to become Catholic, become One United Church?

But I do keenly understand and feel your point. The problem for me though is that through a personal conviction of the Holy Spirit, before I was even back to the Catholic Church, I was led to believe that this teaching of the Church is truly correct.

God Bless,
Maria

 

[FromTheCrossroa]

Respectfully, I disagree with you…cut for length

I think we agree (with conditions). The nicene creed was designed to unify the church. Anyone professing it as their faith shows solidarity with the Catholic church. I can’t say that I always had the understanding I do now. For instance, the first time I heard “we believe in the one holy Catholic and Apostolic church”, I said…um wait a minute! I didn’t know what Catholic meant. I had to discover that on my own.

Even though I misunderstood, I know my faith (in spite of my misunderstandings) was no different than it is today. In my journey here, I continue to be surprised how close my own understanding is to what the Church teaches. I agree no one who can not reason what the words of the creed mean can not consent to it nor should take communion in the Church.

I could not recieve communion with my Evangelical brothers and sisters in Christ because they did not believe in the Real Presence.

It was not just that I saw no meaning in recieving, I was convicted by the Spirit that I COULD NOT recieve with my brothers and sisters in Christ because we did not have the same beliefs…cut again

I can tell you not all little “c” churches teach incorrectly. It was a shock to me to see how many Protestants (here) deny real presence because I’ve always known it to be. Am I an apparition from Protestantism? I remember more than one sermon in the main church I grew up in that taught the scandal of real presence and how serious and solemn it was. Yes they used grape juice (because of cost and respect for those who considered alcohol a “sin”) and wafers ordered from a discount catalog, but nonetheless taught correctly even if the implements were foreign to Catholic tradition.

Would I take communion with my old church today? No I would not for reasons that their doctrine has shifted and I no longer would feel comfortable going to their house and worshiping God there in that manner. Would I suffer the consequences spoken of when communion is taken incorrectly if I did take communion while visiting? I don’t believe so. I’m with you that I wouldn’t want to.

But then I realize that I actually do see the wisdom of the Church and its rules.

We see over and over the exhortation to “be one body”. If the rules were changed and anyone could recieve in the Catholic Church, what reason would anyone have to become Catholic, become One United Church?

But I do keenly understand and feel your point. The problem for me though is that through a personal conviction of the Holy Spirit, before I was even back to the Catholic Church, I was led to believe that this teaching of the Church is truly correct.

God Bless,
Maria

I completely understand your point. I believe it to be valid. If anyone can just come in and receive communion, then yes there could be problems. There is cost involved in taking communion. Someone should not be able to walk in off the street, say I accepted Jesus into my heart and waltz up front to get communion. That in my mind is an irresponsible misuse of grace and should be avoided.

Let me put it another way and for a moment, put aside tradition.

Lets say for arguments sake, I am fully Catholic and in communion with the Church. Christmas comes around and my mother (also Christian) comes with my family to mass. Lets also say for arguments sake that I am the lay-priest/head of the household as we come together in my church for worship. Lets also assume that as the lay-priest, and I take my mom (non-Catholic but catholic) to mass. But before I do, I teach her as I have been taught by the Church about the Eucharist. With me so far?

Now lets go further and say after teaching my mom what the Eucharist is I affirm that she does in fact believe correctly. I explain the creed (as it was unfortunately not explained to me before I first went) and in her heart, she can affirm the creed as her belief. I now bring her to mass with me, she affirms the creed as her belief, has proper understanding of the Eucharist, we worship & take communion together as a family. Keeping in mind that we’re still “suspending tradition”, do you believe that I would be incorrect in uniting my family in worship, or should I have just let her watch TBN or Joel Osteen alone while I worshiped God in Spirit and in truth?

My honest belief is this would not be a sin against God in spite of the well reasoned tradition. Christ often violated tradition when tradition violated a higher truth. I am not suggesting I would do as I supposed, only that I believe that as a full member of the Church, there should be an avenue of grace for special circumstances. However, for becoming a full member of the church, there should (and rightly so) be a requirement for education and formal commitment before regular communion should be allowed.

 

[MariaG]

I think we agree (with conditions). …
…
Let me put it another way and for a moment, put aside tradition.

Lets say for arguments sake, I am fully Catholic and in communion with the Church. Christmas comes around and my mother (also Christian) comes with my family to mass. Lets also say for arguments sake that I am the lay-priest/head of the household as we come together in my church for worship. Lets also assume that as the lay-priest, and I take my mom (non-Catholic but catholic) to mass. But before I do, I teach her as I have been taught by the Church about the Eucharist. With me so far?

Now lets go further and say after teaching my mom what the Eucharist is I affirm that she does in fact believe correctly. I explain the creed (as it was unfortunately not explained to me before I first went) and in her heart, she can affirm the creed as her belief. I now bring her to mass with me, she affirms the creed as her belief, has proper understanding of the Eucharist, we worship & take communion together as a family. Keeping in mind that we’re still “suspending tradition”, do you believe that I would be incorrect in uniting my family in worship, or should I have just let her watch TBN or Joel Osteen alone while I worshiped God in Spirit and in truth?

My honest belief is this would not be a sin against God in spite of the well reasoned tradition. Christ often violated tradition when tradition violated a higher truth. I am not suggesting I would do as I supposed, only that I believe that as a full member of the Church, there should be an avenue of grace for special circumstances. However, for becoming a full member of the church, there should (and rightly so) be a requirement for education and formal commitment before regular communion should be allowed.

You have complete hit the nail on the head with this one.

I think I actually may agree with you. Although it is contrary to how things were done in the Early Church as well as today. But I do not know if this is a rule that can change or if it must stay the same?

I struggle with this. Maybe if I understood whether or not it COULD change or not, it would be easier but I often wonder about those “who through no fault of their own” and the hurt we may cause to those who do not understand why we have a closed communion even to those who believe in the Real Presence.

I do believe in special circumstances, individual priests can make the call to give communion to non-Catholic Christians for special circumstances. So should “special circumstances” be broadened? Or by doing so do we lose the very idenity that we so love about the Catholic Church and makes us Catholic?

Glad I don’t have to answer these questions

God Bless,
Maria

 

[awantz]

Tgis is an issue that even some catholics have. My sister-in-law has been questioning her own catholic faith, because she doesn’t understand why she has to go to the priest when she can go straight to Christ. That is also an issue protestants have. That is one of the main things keeping protestants from wanting to convert to catholicism and is making some catholics question their own faith. In the protestant church there is the option to go confess sins to the pastor/priest, but it is not a requirement. If it wasn’t a requirement I don’t think it would be an issue at all.

 

[MariaG]

Tgis is an issue that even some catholics have. My sister-in-law has been questioning her own catholic faith, because she doesn’t understand why she has to go to the priest when she can go straight to Christ. That is also an issue protestants have. That is one of the main things keeping protestants from wanting to convert to catholicism and is making some catholics question their own faith.

I pray that you have directed her to scripture John20:21-23?

While I know that non-Catholics say this is the great commission of going out and preaching Christ’s forgiveness, it does not say to go out and preach forgiveness, it says go and forgive.

We believe we confess to God with a priest because this is the way Christ directed us to.

It is also really beautiful in how there are two places in scripture where God breathes on Man. First on is in Genesis when God breathes the soul into Adam. And then again in John where God incarnate breathes on the apostles and gives the gift of reconciliation, for the renewal of our souls. Absolutely beautiful.

It should be seen as a gift from God, (the first gift He gave us after rising from the Dead!) and not a burden.

God Bless,
Maria

 

[FromTheCrossroa]

You have complete hit the nail on the head with this one.

I think I actually may agree with you. Although it is contrary to how things were done in the Early Church as well as today. But I do not know if this is a rule that can change or if it must stay the same?

I struggle with this. Maybe if I understood whether or not it COULD change or not, it would be easier but I often wonder about those “who through no fault of their own” and the hurt we may cause to those who do not understand why we have a closed communion even to those who believe in the Real Presence.

I do believe in special circumstances, individual priests can make the call to give communion to non-Catholic Christians for special circumstances. So should “special circumstances” be broadened? Or by doing so do we lose the very idenity that we so love about the Catholic Church and makes us Catholic?

Glad I don’t have to answer these questions

God Bless,
Maria

What I have come to appreciate about the Catholic Church is there is an avenue for reform and change as the Holy Spirit directs. Even though change does not occur as quickly as it can in non-Catholic churches. In my experience, that is a good thing. Vatican II did take 1900 or so years. Honestly, I don’t know if I would have been able to “convert” before V2.

From my window on “Misconception Lane”, I thought the Church to be rigid, legalistic, and out of step with my beliefs. Thank God for the Holy Spirit, and my willingness to not be what I thought the Church was from my first impression.

I don’t honestly know if my priest would say yes that is a special occasion or he would say no. Its a conversation I would love to have with the seminarian or one of the priests in my parish someday just to see what they think. Even if they said yes, I’d be sure to go back and ask them again before I just mozey’d on down with mom in tow. I’ve actually been educating my mom on the Church as I have been taught. So far, its led to some very interesting conversations. Who knows what will come of it.

 

[FromTheCrossroa]

You have complete hit the nail on the head with this one.

I think I actually may agree with you. Although it is contrary to how things were done in the Early Church as well as today. But I do not know if this is a rule that can change or if it must stay the same?

I struggle with this. Maybe if I understood whether or not it COULD change or not, it would be easier but I often wonder about those “who through no fault of their own” and the hurt we may cause to those who do not understand why we have a closed communion even to those who believe in the Real Presence.

I do believe in special circumstances, individual priests can make the call to give communion to non-Catholic Christians for special circumstances. So should “special circumstances” be broadened? Or by doing so do we lose the very idenity that we so love about the Catholic Church and makes us Catholic?

Glad I don’t have to answer these questions

God Bless,
Maria

What I have come to appreciate about the Catholic Church is there is an avenue for reform and change as the Holy Spirit directs. Even though change does not occur as quickly as it can in non-Catholic churches. In my experience, that is a good thing.

From my window on “Misconception Lane”, I thought the Church to be rigid, legalistic, and out of step with my beliefs. Thank God for the Holy Spirit, and my willingness to not be what I thought the Church was from my first impression.

I don’t honestly know if my priest would say yes that is a special occasion or he would say no. Its a conversation I would love to have with the seminarian or one of the priests in my parish someday just to see what they think.

 

[kage_ar]

I have had acountability parteners at various times in my life. These were generally friends that I trusted with my secrets anyhow, so they weren’t likely to go blabbing stuff about me to others. Also with an acountability partener, they are tell you things as well so it makes the Golden Rule a bit more real to them.

Stepping in late here… I think this touches on one of the issues Protestants have with Confession. The idea of the seal of confession - that you could trust another human being and know WITHOUT DOUBT that what you say will never be repeated. That kind of seal does not exist in the Protestant world - so it is hard to wrap the mind around that kind of trust.

As a convert, I know how mind boggling that was…

 

[FromTheCrossroa]

You have complete hit the nail on the head with this one.

I think I actually may agree with you. Although it is contrary to how things were done in the Early Church as well as today. But I do not know if this is a rule that can change or if it must stay the same?

I struggle with this. Maybe if I understood whether or not it COULD change or not, it would be easier but I often wonder about those “who through no fault of their own” and the hurt we may cause to those who do not understand why we have a closed communion even to those who believe in the Real Presence.

I do believe in special circumstances, individual priests can make the call to give communion to non-Catholic Christians for special circumstances. So should “special circumstances” be broadened? Or by doing so do we lose the very idenity that we so love about the Catholic Church and makes us Catholic?

Glad I don’t have to answer these questions

God Bless,
Maria

What I have come to appreciate about the Catholic Church is there is an avenue for reform and change as the Holy Spirit directs. Even though change does not occur as quickly as it can in non-Catholic churches. In my experience, that is a good thing.

From my window on “Misconception Lane”, I thought the Church to be rigid, legalistic, and out of step with my beliefs. Thank God for the Holy Spirit, and my willingness to not be what I thought the Church was from my first impression.

I don’t honestly know if my priest would say yes that is a special occasion or he would say no. Its a conversation I would love to have with the seminarian or one of the priests in my parish someday just to see what they think.

I have actually had informal discussions (or educated) my non-catholic mom as I have learned more about the Church. It’s led to some very interesting discussions. I have no idea what will come of it.

 

[FromTheCrossroa]

Tgis is an issue that even some catholics have. My sister-in-law has been questioning her own catholic faith, because she doesn’t understand why she has to go to the priest when she can go straight to Christ. That is also an issue protestants have. That is one of the main things keeping protestants from wanting to convert to catholicism and is making some catholics question their own faith. In the protestant church there is the option to go confess sins to the pastor/priest, but it is not a requirement. If it wasn’t a requirement I don’t think it would be an issue at all.

My wife (lifelong Catholic) insists its not necessary to keep going to confession to be Catholic. She grew up under her mom (former nun) with much the same idea about it. I’ve come to a better understanding by reading a book called “Catholic & Christian” written by a Fransiscan Professor/Theologian. I think it was under 15 dollars @ Barnes & Knoble. It might be worth checking out for your sister-in-law as well.

When I get to my first confession, I may not be very comfortable getting into the closed box. But honestly, I’ve done it before when I talked privately with Pastor’s in the past. He just didn’t say “ok, I forgive you”. At least, I don’t remember them saying those words to me.