Why Catholicism?

[Searching4Him]

Hello,

I am a practicing Christian who was raised in the Catholic Church but left it when I went away to college. I have spent the past ten years attending Protestant services and searching for a denomination that I could embrace. Two years ago I married a woman from a strong Catholic family and we now have a son of five months. I have tried to be my family’s spiritual leader but feel that I am floundering by not having set my roots into a particular church.

I have spent the past year away from home while deployed to Iraq and have had ample time to stew, pray, read and research my situation while searching for an answer. I have found both wonderful and negative (as I perceive them) attributes to Catholic and Protestant beliefs, and while I personally enjoy the services/community of the latter, I continue to feel a draw back to the Catholic Church.

Below are some doctrinal questions that I still struggle with which block my path like a mountain. Please forgive me if they are worded like an inquisition, I promise that I am not a skeptic but simply bogged down in confusion. I would appreciate any insight that may help me in my journey. I would love to return home in three months with a clear spiritual understanding of where I need to lead my family. Thank you for your time and any prayers for assistance.

1. What is the foundation of Catholicism that separates it from other Christian denominations?
2. Is this foundation exclusive (according to Catholicism, will the other Christian denominations have salvation)?
3. Is it possible that the Protestant Reformation was divinely inspired to carry a badly manipulated religion (at the time) into the proper direction? i.e.- God was not pleased with selling of indulgences, buying of spiritual positions, extortion of wealth, etc.
4. Catholicism is unique in its seven Holy Sacraments, but of these how many are truly rooted in biblical truth? For example:
   a.Infant Baptism: Did not occur in the bible, in fact the bible states that this practice is a public testimony for those who’ve knowingly placed their faith in Christ. Infant baptism began in the 6th century out of fear that a deceased child would be damned by original sin.
   b.Reconciliation: I understand that Christ sent his apostles out with the ability to forgive or retain sin and I agree that today’s clergy are extensions of those apostles. However, am I unable to have Christ forgive my sins unless I confess and act on penance with a priest? If so, where is it stated that a priest must “filter” my sins before Christ. If I die before having confessed my sins through reconciliation am I damned? What role do indulgences play? How is it possible to earn an indulgence and apply that towards a deceased acquaintance? Does this not contradict the biblical teachings that forgiveness cannot be “earned” but only accepted as a gift of Christ’s love.
5. Why do Catholics so quickly claim to have the one true religion? Christ teaches that salvation is a gift, given through His sacrifice, unachievable through any amount of acts, personal to the individual but celebrated as a community. What part of the market does Catholicism have cornered in which I have to pass certain gates or requirements to earn this gift? In other words, concerning Christian denominations, Catholicism is very much exclusive whereas Protestant branches are inclusive to all those who believe in Christ’s cleansing blood.

 

[1ke]

1. What is the foundation of Catholicism that separates it from other Christian denominations?

Matthew 16:15-19; Matthew 18:18; John 20:21-23.

1. Is this foundation exclusive (according to Catholicism, will the other Christian denominations have salvation)?

Yes, the foundation is exclusive-- the keys were given to Peter. And, no that does not mean non-Catholics are automatically condemned. I suggest a couple of things you can read to understand the Church’s role, mission, and salvific function along with othere Christian groups and their relationship to the Catholic Church.

Article 9 in the Catechism, all 6 paragraphs.

The declaration from the Vatican, Dominus Jesus.

1. Is it possible that the Protestant Reformation was divinely inspired to carry a badly manipulated religion (at the time) into the proper direction? i.e.- God was not pleased with selling of indulgences, buying of spiritual positions, extortion of wealth, etc.

No. Christ is not the author of confusion. Christ is not the author of conflicting doctrines.

The Council of Trent is the reformation of the Catholic Church. The Protestant movements broke from unity and the visible headship, renounced the authority of the Church and the priesthood. They were not a reformation. They were a departure.

I suggest you read this encyclical of John Paul II:

vatican.va/holy_father/john_paul_ii/encyclicals/documents/hf_jp-ii_enc_25051995_ut-unum-sint_en.html

1. Catholicism is unique in its seven Holy Sacraments, but of these how many are truly rooted in biblical truth?

(a) The Catholic Church is not unique in the Seven Sacraments. The Orthodox Churches have the same Sacraments.

(b) All seven are rooted in biblical truth.

(c) The Bible is not the sole rule of faith. Scripture AND Sacred Tradition are both the living doctrine of the Church.

 a.Infant Baptism: Did not occur in the bible, in fact the bible states that this practice is a public testimony for those who’ve knowingly placed their faith in Christ.  Infant baptism began in the 6th century out of fear that a deceased child would be damned by original sin.

This is simply untrue. Lydia’s entire household was baptized. There are several other references. Nowhere does the bible exclude those under the age of reason or mentally challenged individuals. See more here.

The sixth century is a very late dating of infant baptism. Not sure where you get that. Here are several of the Early Church Fathers on infant baptism, dating back much earlier.

b.Reconciliation: I understand that Christ sent his apostles out with the ability to forgive or retain sin and I agree that today’s clergy are extensions of those apostles. However, am I unable to have Christ forgive my sins unless I confess and act on penance with a priest? If so, where is it stated that a priest must “filter” my sins before Christ. If I die before having confessed my sins through reconciliation am I damned? What role do indulgences play? How is it possible to earn an indulgence and apply that towards a deceased acquaintance? Does this not contradict the biblical teachings that forgiveness cannot be “earned” but only accepted as a gift of Christ’s love.

Short answer is, yes you must confess your mortal sins to a priest and receive the Sacrament of Reconciliation to restore grace to your soul and no, the things you mention in no way contradict any biblical teaching. You have asked a LOT of questions in one post. The typical forum protocol is to create individual posting on each topic as threads become unwieldy when so many topics are intertwined. I invite you to do this with your questions.

I also encourage you to read these short articles on all the Sacraments.

1. Why do Catholics so quickly claim to have the one true religion?

Because there can be only one, and Christ gave the keys to Peter.

Christ teaches that salvation is a gift, given through His sacrifice, unachievable through any amount of acts, personal to the individual but celebrated as a community. What part of the market does Catholicism have cornered in which I have to pass certain gates or requirements to earn this gift? In other words, concerning Christian denominations, Catholicism is very much exclusive whereas Protestant branches are inclusive to all those who believe in Christ’s cleansing blood.

I think you misunderstand both what you perceive as an exclusivity of Catholicism AND also I think you fail to grasp that in the Protestant rushto be “inclusive” their doctrine has become meaningless. Many do not preach Christ crucified, as Paul would say. They preach “do whatever” and “God doesn’t really care what you do as long as you are a nice person.” In fact, there are groups claiming to be Christian that don’t even believe Christ is God.

There is ONE Doctrine and ONE Faith. The fullness of that Truth can be found in the Catholic Church.

Reading the documents I linked to touch on this issue. I hope you will take time to read them, and also get a copy of the Catechism and read it.

 

[Randy_Carson]

1. What is the foundation of Catholicism that separates it from other Christian denominations?

Jesus founded only one church and named Peter to be the head of that church. That church, the Catholic Church, still exists.

I will provide some food for thought concerning Peter and the papacy.

Peter – The Rock and the Keeper of the Keys

"When Jesus came to the region of Caesarea Philippi, he asked his disciples, “Who do people say the Son of Man is?” They replied, “Some say John the Baptist; others say Elijah; and still others, Jeremiah or one of the prophets.” “But what about you?” he asked. “Who do you say I am?” Simon Peter answered, “You are the Christ, the Son of the living God.” Jesus replied, “Blessed are you, Simon son of Jonah, for this was not revealed to you by man, but by my Father in heaven. And I tell you that you are Peter, and on this rock I will build my church, and the gates of Hades will not overcome it. I will give you the keys of the kingdom of heaven; whatever you bind on earth will be bound in heaven, and whatever you loose on earth will be loosed in heaven.” (Matthew 16:13-19)

1. Peter’s understanding that Jesus was the Son of God did not come from working it out on his own. Instead, God the Father infused this revelation into Peter’s mind thus imprinting His seal of approval upon this humble fisherman. Jesus recognized that Simon had already been anointed by His Father in this way and declared, “Blessed are you.” The Father had blessed Simon with knowledge of the Son.
2. Jesus gave him the name, “Kepha”, an Aramaic word that means “rock”. In the original, the passage would read, “You are kepha, and on this kepha I will build my church.” Jesus also announces the establishment of His Church, and clearly delineates Kepha as its leader. Although Jesus spoke Aramaic, the New Testament was written in Greek, and “Kepha” would have been translated into the Greek words for “rock” which are “petra” or “petros”. “Petra” is the feminine form of the masculine word, “petros”. Petros is more suitable for a man. Therefore, from “petros” we derive the English name, “Peter”. For us modern readers then, Jesus’ pronouncement reads, “You are Peter and upon this rock I will build my church.” What is it about Peter’s character that caused Jesus to compare him to something as solid as rock? Isn’t this the same Peter who Jesus called “Satan” just a few verses later? (cf. Mt 16:23) Isn’t this the same Peter who would deny the Lord three times after his arrest? (cf. Lk 22:34) Surely this unstable character is anything but solid rock upon which a Church could be built; yet, Jesus sees something deeper in Peter’s character, and His choice would be vindicated when Peter ultimately received a martyr’s crown via crucifixion.
3. The Church to be built was not of human origin. Jesus did not say, “You are Peter, and upon this rock you must build a church.” He said, “I will build my church.” Inaugurated by the Father, built by the Son and led by the Holy Spirit, the Church is a human institution of divine origin.
4. For this reason, “the gates of Hell will not overcome” the Church, and for over 2,000 years the Church, lead by the Apostolic Successors of Peter, has faithfully borne witness to the gospel.

(cont.)

 

[Randy_Carson]

1. Jesus gives to Peter “the keys of the kingdom of heaven”. This alludes to the prophecy of Isaiah that reads, "In that day I will summon my servant, Eliakim son of Hilkiah. I will clothe him with your robe and fasten your sash around him and hand your authority over to him. He will be a father to those who live in Jerusalem and to the house of Judah. I will place on his shoulder the key to the house of David; what he opens no one can shut, and what he shuts no one can open.” (Isaiah 22:22) In ancient times, a king might choose a second in command or prime minister who literally wore a large key as a symbol of his office and who spoke with the authority of the king. Jesus gives Peter the authority to speak in His name and extends his authority beyond the earthly realm when he gives Peter the “keys to the kingdom of heaven.”
2. Finally, Jesus reveals the infallible nature of the Church when he declares, “whatever you bind on earth will be bound in heaven, and whatever you loose on earth will be loosed in heaven." What does this passage mean? There are two possible interpretations. First, if God reciprocates the binding and loosing of Church on earth with an identical binding or loosing in heaven, then the binding and loosing done on earth must of necessity be free from all error. If this were not so, God would have put himself in the impossible situation of affirming that which is not true. A second interpretation would be that the authority of the church is to carry out the will and decisions of God upon earth as they have been established in heaven. This is in perfect accord with the way Jesus instructed us to pray: “Your will be done on earth as it is in heaven” (Matthew 6:10). Thus, the Church must either be prevented from teaching error in order that God may ratify its decisions in heaven or the Church must be proclaiming here below those things that are already true in heaven. Either way, the decisions and actions of the Church can be seen to be infallible with regard to matters of faith and morals. Anything less would make Jesus a liar for He also declared, “But when he, the Spirit of truth, comes, he will guide you into all truth” (John 16:13) and “I am with you always till the end of the world.” (Matthew 28:20)

Peter, the first Pope, as Vicar of Christ

In John 21 we read:

15When they had finished eating, Jesus said to Simon Peter, “Simon son of John, do you truly love me more than these?” “Yes, Lord,” he said, “you know that I love you.” Jesus said, “Feed my lambs.” 16Again Jesus said, “Simon son of John, do you truly love me?” He answered, “Yes, Lord, you know that I love you.” Jesus said, “Take care of my sheep.” 17 The third time he said to him, “Simon son of John, do you love me?” Peter was hurt because Jesus asked him the third time, “Do you love me?” He said, “Lord, you know all things; you know that I love you.” Jesus said, "Feed my sheep.

In this passage, we can see that Jesus leaves Peter in charge of feeding, tending and caring for His sheep. Who feeds, tends and cares for sheep? A shepherd!

We know that Jesus is the Good Shepherd and that there is one Shepherd and one flock (cf. John 10). Yet, in the passage above, we can see that Jesus leaves Peter in charge of feeding, tending and caring for His sheep. Peter becomes the shepherd who will lead the flock after Jesus’ ascension. Therefore, while Jesus is forever our Good Shepherd reigning from heaven, He has made provision for us by naming someone else to stand in His place, to be His vicar, here on earth. The Vicar of Christ established by Jesus is the Pope of the Catholic Church.

Therefore, not only does Peter (and his successors, the Popes) hold the keys to the kingdom of God (cf. Mt 16:18, Is. 22:22), but he holds the shepherd’s crook or crozier, as well.

 

[Randy_Carson]

1. Is this foundation exclusive (according to Catholicism, will the other Christian denominations have salvation)?

Yes, the foundation of Catholicism as my posts above suggest. Jesus did not say, "I will build my churches (plural) in Matthew 16:18. He promised to build a single church and he conferred the leadership of the Church upon Peter alone. As a military man, I’m sure you understand chain of command. Jesus left Peter in charge of the Church here on earth. Peter’s successors, the popes, have continued that command.

Yes, other Christians of other denominations may be saved. In the Catechism of the Catholic Church we read:

**Who belongs to the Catholic Church? **
[836](javascriptpenWindow(‘cr/836.htm’) "All men are called to this catholic unity of the People of God. . . . And to it, in different ways, belong or are ordered: the Catholic faithful, others who believe in Christ, and finally all mankind, called by God’s grace to salvation."320
[837](javascriptpenWindow(‘cr/837.htm’) "Fully incorporated into the society of the Church are those who, possessing the Spirit of Christ, accept all the means of salvation given to the Church together with her entire organization, and who - by the bonds constituted by the profession of faith, the sacraments, ecclesiastical government, and communion - are joined in the visible structure of the Church of Christ, who rules her through the Supreme Pontiff and the bishops. Even though incorporated into the Church, one who does not however persevere in charity is not saved. He remains indeed in the bosom of the Church, but ‘in body’ not ‘in heart.’"321 [838](javascriptpenWindow(‘cr/838.htm’) "The Church knows that she is joined in many ways to the baptized who are honored by the name of Christian, but do not profess the Catholic faith in its entirety or have not preserved unity or communion under the successor of Peter."322 Those "who believe in Christ and have been properly baptized are put in a certain, although imperfect, communion with the Catholic Church."323 With the Orthodox Churches, this communion is so profound "that it lacks little to attain the fullness that would permit a common celebration of the Lord’s Eucharist."324

 

[Randy_Carson]

1. Is it possible that the Protestant Reformation was divinely inspired to carry a badly manipulated religion (at the time) into the proper direction? i.e.- God was not pleased with selling of indulgences, buying of spiritual positions, extortion of wealth, etc.

No. Jesus prayed “that they may be one”. The disunity among Christians is a scandal in the eyes of the world and hinders others from coming to salvation.

The Church may have needed to reform itself during the era that you referenced, but rebellion was not the solution. Luther, Calvin and Zwingli were not reformers; they were rebels.

More importantly, the loss of valid sacraments in the Protestant faith communities is problematic. The sacraments were given to us by God for our good. Losing something good cannot be part of the Divine plan.

(And FWIW, indulgences were never sold, but I don’t want to derail this thread.)

 

[catholic1seeks]

1. What is the foundation of Catholicism that separates it from other Christian denominations?

(1) Historically, the Catholic Church is Christ’s Church. The Catholic Church was the only Church founded by Jesus Christ. Jesus founded only one church, and the only church that fully reaches back to the time of approx. 33 AD is the Catholic Church. The Eastern Orthodox Church goes back to the time of the Apostles, also, because they have valid Apostolic Succession - their bishops are successors of the apostles. However, they miss one critical factor of Christ’s Church:

In Matthew 16:18, Jesus declares that he is “building” His Church on Peter, the Rock. He is the Apostle that receives the “Keys of the Kingdom” (Matthew 16:19), signifying his authority to bind and lose. The image of the “Keys” goes back tot the Old Covenant’s House of David: one minister was set out above all the rest and given the “keys”; he had much authority received from the king. He had successors. In the new Kingodom - Christ’s Kingdom - Christ *the King *makes Peter the chief steward.

Peter was a central figure to the early Church’s unity. His successors continued to maintain a source of unity and authority. For example, St. Clement of Rome, the third successor of St. Peter, wrote a powerful letter the Corinthians. He even told them he was sorry for not writing to them sooner.

Today, Peter’s successor – Pope – is obviously a major source to the Church’s unity. At the time of the Protestant Reformation, Martin Luther rejected the pope’s authority - and the Church’s authority, for that matter - and focused only on the Bible as one’s rule of faith, authority, etc. So this is a main difference between Catholicism and Protestantism or any other Christian group.

1. Is this foundation exclusive (according to Catholicism, will the other Christian denominations have salvation)?

Of course. God desires all men to be saved. You may have heard of the phrase “Outside the Church there is no salvation.” The teaching must be understood in its entire context. This only means that the gospel message, the sacraments, etc. come from Christ through the Church. Christ is not separated from His Church; it’s His Body, His Bride.

We don’t throw away the fact that Christ did establish a Church that would “teach all nations” and “baptize in the name of the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit”. The Catholic Church has all Christ-instituted 7 sacraments while other Christian bodies have as many as two.

1. Is it possible that the Protestant Reformation was divinely inspired to carry a badly manipulated religion (at the time) into the proper direction? i.e.- God was not pleased with selling of indulgences, buying of spiritual positions, extortion of wealth, etc.

I think the Reformation had good and bad effects. The division probably was not God’s will, but He brings good out of evil. The Protestant Reformation was able to bring about an internal Reformation - within the Church.

1. Catholicism is unique in its seven Holy Sacraments, but of these how many are truly rooted in biblical truth? For example:
   a.Infant Baptism: Did not occur in the bible, in fact the bible states that this practice is a public testimony for those who’ve knowingly placed their faith in Christ. Infant baptism began in the 6th century out of fear that a deceased child would be damned by original sin.

Infant Baptism can be seen as foreshadowed in the Old Covenant’s circumcision. Only adult converts would have to accept the faith; the infants didn’t - obviously.

In the NT, entire households were baptized. Surely children and infants were included in this realm.

[still posting…]

 

[Randy_Carson]

1. Catholicism is unique in its seven Holy Sacraments, but of these how many are truly rooted in biblical truth? For example:
   a.Infant Baptism: Did not occur in the bible, in fact the bible states that this practice is a public testimony for those who’ve knowingly placed their faith in Christ. Infant baptism began in the 6th century out of fear that a deceased child would be damned by original sin.

The Bible does not prohibit the baptism of infants; conversely, there are numerous passages which suggest that infants were baptized.

INFANT BAPTISM PROVED FROM SCRIPTURE

Old Covenant

Genesis 17:9-14
9 Then God said to Abraham, “As for you, you must keep my covenant, you and your descendants after you for the generations to come. 10 This is my covenant with you and your descendants after you, the covenant you are to keep: Every male among you shall be circumcised. 11 You are to undergo circumcision, and it will be the sign of the covenant between me and you. 12 For the generations to come every male among you who is eight days old must be circumcised, including those born in your household or bought with money from a foreigner—those who are not your offspring. 13 Whether born in your household or bought with your money, they must be circumcised. My covenant in your flesh is to be an everlasting covenant. 14 Any uncircumcised male, who has not been circumcised in the flesh, will be cut off from his people; he has broken my covenant.”

Leviticus 12:3
3 On the eighth day the boy is to be circumcised.

These texts show the circumcision of eight-day-old babies as the way of entering into the Old Covenant.

Connection to New Covenant

Col 2:11-12
In him also you were circumcised with a circumcision made without hands, by putting off the body of flesh in the circumcision of Christ; 12and you were buried with him in baptism, in which you were also raised with him through faith in the working of God, who raised him from the dead.

Baptism is the new “circumcision of Christ” for all people of the New Covenant.

Do Infants Need Baptism?

Job 14:1-4
1 "Man born of woman is of few days and full of trouble. 2 He springs up like a flower and withers away; like a fleeting shadow, he does not endure. 3 Do you fix your eye on such a one? Will you bring him before you for judgment? 4 Who can bring what is pure from the impure? No one!

Psalm 51:5
5 Surely I was sinful at birth, sinful from the time my mother conceived me.

We are conceived in the iniquity of sin. This shows the need for baptism from the moment of conception.

Jesus Extols Child-like Faith

Matthew 18:2-5
2 He called a little child and had him stand among them. 3And he said: "I tell you the truth, unless you change and become like little children, you will never enter the kingdom of heaven. 4Therefore, whoever humbles himself like this child is the greatest in the kingdom of heaven.

Jesus says unless we become like children, we cannot enter into heaven. So why would children be excluded from baptism?

Jesus Receives Little Children and Infants

Matt 19:13-15
13Then little children were brought to Jesus for him to place his hands on them and pray for them. But the disciples rebuked those who brought them. 14 Jesus said, “Let the little children come to me, and do not hinder them, for the kingdom of heaven belongs to such as these.” 15 When he had placed his hands on them, he went on from there.

Mark 10:13-16
13People were bringing little children to Jesus to have him touch them, but the disciples rebuked them. 14When Jesus saw this, he was indignant. He said to them, “Let the little children come to me, and do not hinder them, for the kingdom of God belongs to such as these. 15I tell you the truth, anyone who will not receive the kingdom of God like a little child will never enter it.” 16And he took the children in his arms, put his hands on them and blessed them.

Jesus says to let the children come to Him for the kingdom of God also belongs to them. There is no age limit on entering the kingdom, and no age limit for being eligible for baptism.

(cont.)

 

[Randy_Carson]

Luke 18:15-17
15People were also bringing babies to Jesus to have him touch them. When the disciples saw this, they rebuked them. 16But Jesus called the children to him and said, “Let the little children come to me, and do not hinder them, for the kingdom of God belongs to such as these. 17I tell you the truth, anyone who will not receive the kingdom of God like a little child will never enter it.”

The Church Begins to Preach Baptism

Acts 2:38-39
38 Peter replied, “Repent and be baptized, every one of you, in the name of Jesus Christ for the forgiveness of your sins. And you will receive the gift of the Holy Spirit. 39 The promise is for you and your children and for all who are far off—for all whom the Lord our God will call.”

Peter did not say, “Every one of you adults”; he said, “Every one of you” without qualification and added “the promise (of the Holy Spirit) is for you and your children”. Baptism and the Holy Spirit are frequently connected throughout the Bible (cf. Ez. 36:25-27, Mt. 3:16, Jn. 3:5).

Acts 10:47-48
Then Peter said, 47"Can anyone keep these people from being baptized with water? They have received the Holy Spirit just as we have." 48So he ordered that they be baptized in the name of Jesus Christ. Then they asked Peter to stay with them for a few days.

Peter baptized the entire house of Cornelius which probably included infants and young children. There is not one word in this passage (or any other in scripture) about baptism being limited to adults.

Acts 16:15
13On the Sabbath we went outside the city gate to the river, where we expected to find a place of prayer. We sat down and began to speak to the women who had gathered there. 14One of those listening was a woman named Lydia, a dealer in purple cloth from the city of Thyatira, who was a worshiper of God. The Lord opened her heart to respond to Paul’s message. 15When she and the members of her household were baptized, she invited us to her home.

Paul baptized Lydia and her entire household. The word “household” comes from the Greek word “oikos” which is a household that includes infants and children. Further, Paul baptizes the household based on Lydia’s faith, not the faith of the members of the household. This demonstrates that parents can present their children for baptism based on the parents’ faith, not the children’s faith.

From the Catechism of the Catholic Church:

The Baptism of infants

1250 Born with a fallen human nature and tainted by original sin, children also have need of the new birth in Baptism to be freed from the power of darkness and brought into the realm of the freedom of the children of God, to which all men are called.50 The sheer gratuitousness of the grace of salvation is particularly manifest in infant Baptism. The Church and the parents would deny a child the priceless grace of becoming a child of God were they not to confer Baptism shortly after birth.51

1251 Christian parents will recognize that this practice also accords with their role as nurturers of the life that God has entrusted to them.52

1252 The practice of infant Baptism is an immemorial tradition of the Church. There is explicit testimony to this practice from the second century on, and it is quite possible that, from the beginning of the apostolic preaching, when whole “households” received baptism, infants may also have been baptized.53

 

[Randy_Carson]

1. Catholicism is unique in its seven Holy Sacraments, but of these how many are truly rooted in biblical truth? For example:
   b.Reconciliation: I understand that Christ sent his apostles out with the ability to forgive or retain sin and I agree that today’s clergy are extensions of those apostles. However, am I unable to have Christ forgive my sins unless I confess and act on penance with a priest? If so, where is it stated that a priest must “filter” my sins before Christ. If I die before having confessed my sins through reconciliation am I damned?

Since you agree that priest may forgive sins in persona Christi then the only question seems to be what happens if you can’t get to confession. This is not a problem. If you have repented of your sin and resolved to confess it to a priest at your first opportunity, but you die before getting to the confessional, you will still be forgiven. God sees the heart. However, it is still normatively necessary to confess to a priest apart from this extreme circumstance.

What role do indulgences play? How is it possible to earn an indulgence and apply that towards a deceased acquaintance? Does this not contradict the biblical teachings that forgiveness cannot be “earned” but only accepted as a gift of Christ’s love.

Indulgences do not apply to forgiveness which cannot be earned. Indulgences lessen the temporal punishment due for sin. If a child breaks a window, his father may forgive him (forgiveness of the trespass), but the child may be grounded for the misbehavior and asked to pay for the replacement (temporal punishment).

These articles may help:

Articles on Indulgences

---

A PRIMER ON INDULGENCES
By James Akin
catholic.com/library/primer_on_indulgences.asp

**MYTHS ABOUT INDULGENCES **
By James Akin
catholic.com/thisrock/1994/9411fea1sb2.asp
What’s Wrong with a Little Indulgence?
By Jimmy Akin
catholic.com/thisrock/2006/0609fea3.asp

 

[Randy_Carson]

1. Why do Catholics so quickly claim to have the one true religion? Christ teaches that salvation is a gift, given through His sacrifice, unachievable through any amount of acts, personal to the individual but celebrated as a community. What part of the market does Catholicism have cornered in which I have to pass certain gates or requirements to earn this gift? In other words, concerning Christian denominations, Catholicism is very much exclusive whereas Protestant branches are inclusive to all those who believe in Christ’s cleansing blood.

Catholics and Protestants have very different views of the nature of the Church. Catholics believe that Jesus founded a single, visible Church with Peter and his successors as its head. Protestants, on the other hand, believe that the Church is an invisible, spiritual communion of all true believers regardless of their denominational affiliation.

Both Protestants and Catholics agree that Christ founded some Church and that this Church will remain forever (Matt. 16:18). The question is whether this Church is a visible communion that can be identified or whether is it a purely spiritual communion made up of all the saved. If it is a visible communion, the Catholic Church is the only plausible candidate, since only this Church extends back far enough (the Eastern Orthodox communion did not finally break with Rome until the 1450s, a mere sixty years before the Protestant Reformation). We can thus give a limited argument for the third proposition by showing the Church Christ founded is a visible communion.

This is proven in Matthew 16:17-19, the passage in which Christ promised the gates of hell would never prevail against his Church (meaning that it would always exist). Several factors in the text show he was talking about a visible communion.

First, Jesus made Peter head of this Church (Matt. 16:18), yet Jesus was certainly not making Peter the head of an invisible Church. It is Christ’s own prerogative to be head of the invisible communion of Christians stretching from heaven to earth (Eph. 5:23). Therefore, he must have made Peter the head of a visible, earthly church. (We will not argue here that Jesus made Peter the head; even if one disagrees, the remaining arguments prove our case.)

Second, Jesus gave Peter the keys to the kingdom of heaven (Matt. 16:19), which are for use in Church government (compare Isa. 22:22 – the only Old Testament parallel to this verse). But one cannot govern an invisible communion of believers, only a visible one.

Third, Jesus gave Peter the power of binding and loosing (Matt. 16:19), which Matthew 18:17-18 indicates is used in Church discipline. But one cannot exercise Church discipline over an invisible body. Indeed, Matt. 18:17-18 refers it to public excommunication, in which an individual is treated by the church as “a gentile or a tax collector” (that is, as an unbeliever).

Fourth, Jesus explicitly stated that Peter would exercise the power of binding and loosing on earth. This shows his authority is an earthly one, over an earthly Church.

Fifth, Jesus promised the gates of hell would not prevail against his Church (Matt. 16:18), meaning that it would never perish. But it would be ridiculous to promise that an invisible Church would not pass out of existence since some of the Church’s members are in heaven and Christ’s heavenly Church cannot pass away by its very nature. Only a visible, earthly communion needs a promise that it will never perish.

There are thus abundant reasons to conclude that the Church Jesus was discussing in Matthew 16:17-19 was a visible communion of believers, and, since only the Catholic Church goes back that far, only it can be the one Christ founded.

taken from:

The Necessity of Being Catholic
by James Akin
chnetwork.org/journals/nesschurch/ness_7.htm

 

[catholic1seeks]

1. Catholicism is unique in its seven Holy Sacraments, but of these how many are truly rooted in biblical truth? For example:
   a.Infant Baptism: Did not occur in the bible, in fact the bible states that this practice is a public testimony for those who’ve knowingly placed their faith in Christ. Infant baptism began in the 6th century out of fear that a deceased child would be damned by original sin.

The present Catholic attitude accords perfectly with early Christian practices. Origen, for instance, wrote in the third century that “according to the usage of the Church, baptism is given even to infants” (Holilies on Leviticus, 8:3:11 [A.D. 244]). The Council of Carthage, in 253, condemned the opinion that baptism should be withheld from infants until the eighth day after birth. Later, Augustine taught, “The custom of Mother Church in baptizing infants is certainly not to be scorned . . . nor is it to be believed that its tradition is anything except apostolic” (Literal Interpretation of Genesis 10:23:39 [A.D. 408]). (“Infant Baptism”)

See this article:“Infant Baptism”

1. Why do Catholics so quickly claim to have the one true religion? Christ teaches that salvation is a gift, given through His sacrifice, unachievable through any amount of acts, personal to the individual but celebrated as a community. What part of the market does Catholicism have cornered in which I have to pass certain gates or requirements to earn this gift? In other words, concerning Christian denominations, Catholicism is very much exclusive whereas Protestant branches are inclusive to all those who believe in Christ’s cleansing blood.

Similar to my answer to #2, Christ established one Church that was not meant to be separated from the gospel. It *IS *His Body.

The Church is the Bride of Christ. I once heard that just as Eve, Adam’s bride, was formed from Adam’s side, the Church, Christ’s bride, was formed from the sacraments - symbolized by the water and blood that flowed from Christ’s side during His crucifixion.

Catholicism is the true religion because, simply enough, it’s true. The Church is the “pillar and bulwark of the truth” (1 Timothy 3:15).

 

[Erich]

Reconciliation: I understand that Christ sent his apostles out with the ability to forgive or retain sin and I agree that today’s clergy are extensions of those apostles. However, am I unable to have Christ forgive my sins unless I confess and act on penance with a priest?

How would today’s clergy know which sins to forgive and which to retain, without hearing the penitent’s confession?

 

[Wowbagger]

Since you agree that priest may forgive sins in persona Christi then the only question seems to be what happens if you can’t get to confession. This is not a problem. If you have repented of your sin and resolved to confess it to a priest at your first opportunity, but you die before getting to the confessional, you will still be forgiven. God sees the heart. However, it is still normatively necessary to confess to a priest apart from this extreme circumstance.

You guys are doing a wonderful job, so I’m not going to say much here, but I’ve been taught by several sources that venial sins can be forgiven by private acts of prayer, sorrow, and penance. Indeed, my Baltimore Catechism suggests rather strongly that the main point of confession is the forgiveness of mortal sins. So the above is true (and it’s always a good idea to confess even venial sins), but confession is only normatively necessary for grave sin.

I don’t know whether that makes a difference for Searching, but it seemed like a good thing to note.

 

[Searching4Him]

Wow, to everybody who has responded I want to say thank you. I walked outside to the shower stall and had 13 responses waiting on my return. I really appreciate the concern and promptness. I also apologize for the “shotgun blast” of questions I posted. We just got internet on our small outpost and I’ve been kicking these thoughts around for months, so I was eager to find somewhere/someone to seek out answers (we have no permanent priest or chaplain). I’ve never posted on a forum and was unaware of the etiquette. Lastly, thanks for the biblical and doctrinal references, these are what I needed to see.

 

[CentralFLJames]

1. What is the foundation of Catholicism that separates it from other Christian denominations?

Apostolic Authority that gives it the sole divine right to interpret scripture, to teach it and to ordain successors and to forgive sins and effect all the sacrametns of the Church. Authority, credibility and authentincity, AKA Truth, are what seperate Catholicism from any other faith. Orthodox are also very close to us in faith but lack the unity of faith yet have a valid apostolic succession.

1. Is this foundation exclusive (according to Catholicism, will the other Christian denominations have salvation)?

No. Salvation is impossible outside of the Catholic Church. Yet, some others are imperfectly bound to us through baptism and these are unknowwingly imperfect Catholics. Some of these MAY be saved if God extends them Mercy through His Church but we feel its extremely risky to not be a formal member of The Church.

1. Is it possible that the Protestant Reformation was divinely inspired to carry a badly manipulated religion (at the time) into the proper direction? i.e.- God was not pleased with selling of indulgences, buying of spiritual positions, extortion of wealth, etc.

Absolutely not. The Catholic Church had some problems but it was not anywhere near as widespread and all encompassing as the reformers would have liked for all to believe. For example we had some poor monks (Luther) who thought they had more authority than their bishops. There was no officially sanctioned selling of indulgences. Yet no priest probably turned down donations for masses either since charity is considered a virtue. If somone walked up to one of your employees and insisted he take $1000 and told the employees “please give this to your boss since I think God will grant me special favors for me giving this money” would you reject that money?

1. Catholicism is unique in its seven Holy Sacraments, but of these how many are truly rooted in biblical truth? For example:
   a.Infant Baptism: Did not occur in the bible, in fact the bible states that this practice is a public testimony for those who’ve knowingly placed their faith in Christ. Infant baptism began in the 6th century out of fear that a deceased child would be damned by original sin.

First of all you need to remember that there as no bible for 400 years after Christ - The Church assembled the bible from tradition. So the idea that some practise is not biblical does not work at all points in time anyway since traditions dictate what we put in the bible. The bible was not ever intended to be one comprehensive teaching of every aspect of church practise. Secondly, as it turns out there is much scriptural support for infant baptism if one follows all the leads. Baptism replaced circumcision which itself was a rite administered at an early age. Further from the bible we know that entire households were baptised. And as well we know that Jesus himself said “bring the Children to me”.

 b.Reconciliation: I understand that Christ sent his apostles out with the ability to forgive or retain sin and I agree that today’s clergy are extensions of those apostles.  However, am I unable to have Christ forgive my sins unless I confess and act on penance with a priest?  If so, where is it stated that a priest must “filter” my sins before Christ.

b1) Are you unable to have Christ forgive my sins except through a priest?
No. Small sins like venial sins (white lies, less than perfect charity etc.) are forgivable through prayer and conscious thoughts of sorrow. Even Mortal sins CAN in theory be forgiven with PERFECT CONTRITION - but this is EXTREMELY hard to perform and only with God’s grace can anyone achieve it and we never know for certain if we attained to perfect contrition. This is a form of contrition where one is so sorry for their sins that they would rather die than offend God in that way again out of pure love and respect for God - but not in anyway out of fear of punishment (i.e. hell). It is a pure love motive and absolutely out of soul tearing sorrow for presuming upon God’s love and mercy. One will rarely know if they have attained perfect contrition. THIS uncertainty is WHY Christ gave the apostles the ability to forgive sins (or hold them bound) since hearing an apostolic authority say “Through Christ’s name and the authority invested in me I absolve you of your sins”. This means too that an apostolic authority can accept less than perfect contrition for forgivness of sins and The Church has declared that it is acceptable only that one have a desire to not offend God again but it need not be perfect contrition. This is an amazing gift.

Christ would not have uttered the words ‘those sins you hold bound are held bound in heaven and those you release are released in heaven’ had he not meant it to be a real and special authority that could not normally be circumvented. God of course can make an exception but God would not grant an exception to somone maliciously trying to go around His appointed authorities just to be insubordinate.

continued
James

 

[CentralFLJames]

[from prior]

If I die before having confessed my sins through reconciliation am I damned? What role do indulgences play? How is it possible to earn an indulgence and apply that towards a deceased acquaintance? Does this not contradict the biblical teachings that forgiveness cannot be “earned” but only accepted as a gift of Christ’s love.

If you intended to confess your sins as soon as possible - hopefully not. This is why grave sin is so terrible - one is literally cut off from sanctifying grace when one commits a mortal sin. It is a TERRIBLE risk to be in a state of mortal sin and another reason why no one should ever sin with the presumption that one can be forgiven since God is not mocked and might in fact let you perish in your sins if your are presuming upon His mercy and can see far into the future to know you are not sincere. Catholic generally believe that a person who is perfectly remorseful and intends to confess their sins ASAP will not go to hell if they die before confession - bit they might get a very severe penalty in purgatory - even till the end of time (2nd comming). For this reason anyone who commits a mortal sin should quickly come to their senses, form an interior contrition and pray for the grace to say a perfect act of contrition then pray it. If a perfect contrition is made then they can have assurances they will escape hell should they die before confession.

What role do indulgences play? How is it possible to earn an indulgence and apply that towards a deceased acquaintance? Does this not contradict the biblical teachings that forgiveness cannot be “earned” but only accepted as a gift of Christ’s love.

Indulgences help offset the temporal debts we have for our forgiven sins. There is no guarantee and we can never know if we have completely paid our debts.

A decease person can be aided by our own suffrage through the merits of the Church and only in accordance with God’s will. We trust God completely and are at His discretion if we gain a partial or a full plenary indulgence for a deceased person. Bear in mind that those in purgatory are ALREADY forgiven of their sins ot else they would be in hell. Those in purgatory are already judged worthy of heaven and are just waiting for final purification.
Indulgences help us suffer in place of their sufferings to some degree.

Because those in purgatory are already forgiven there is nothing to earn in that respect. What is earned is pardon for the temporal debt still owed on earth. Also note that works of grace are very scriptural and are in essence God’s works through us.

1. Why do Catholics so quickly claim to have the one true religion? Christ teaches that salvation is a gift, given through His sacrifice, unachievable through any amount of acts, personal to the individual but celebrated as a community. What part of the market does Catholicism have cornered in which I have to pass certain gates or requirements to earn this gift? In other words, concerning Christian denominations, Catholicism is very much exclusive whereas Protestant branches are inclusive to all those who believe in Christ’s cleansing blood.

Because Christ only gave the authority to teach to the apostles and to their assignees and because we are the apostolic successors. In essence God “choose us” through the apostles to follow them. Therefor one can not enter the Church without being accepted by an apostolic authority unless done supernaturally by God himself (baptism by desire).

QUOTE=Searching4Him;4975436]
What part of the market does Catholicism have cornered in which I have to pass certain gates or requirements to earn this gift? In other words, concerning Christian denominations, Catholicism is very much exclusive whereas Protestant branches are inclusive to all those who believe in Christ’s cleansing blood.
This “market” is a secular concept. A better metaphor would be “the seas” - since Christ made the apostles fishers of men and souls. The Gate is Christ himself through baptism.
The requirements are believing in Christ, rejecting Satan AND REPENTING. Many of our seperated Protestants brothers often forget the REPENT part. There is another part too - BEING HOLY. This is a lifelone process of sanctification and why we need the sacraments and to repent our life for a life of holines and sanctification to God.

Catholic do not believe in denominations. Catholics are not a denomination. That is just a name we call ourselves as members of The One Church. Mere belief is not enough since the demons of hell belive that Christ is Lord - they believe and fear that more than any of us do. So belief is not enough - one must also act in accordance with that belief and one must repent of sins and obey the commandments and repent each and every time we sin.

James

 

[Randy_Carson]

You guys are doing a wonderful job, so I’m not going to say much here, but I’ve been taught by several sources that venial sins can be forgiven by private acts of prayer, sorrow, and penance. Indeed, my Baltimore Catechism suggests rather strongly that the main point of confession is the forgiveness of mortal sins. So the above is true (and it’s always a good idea to confess even venial sins), but confession is only normatively necessary for grave sin.

I don’t know whether that makes a difference for Searching, but it seemed like a good thing to note.

Good point.

 

[CentralFLJames]

1. Is it possible that the Protestant Reformation was divinely inspired to carry a badly manipulated religion (at the time) into the proper direction? i.e.- God was not pleased with selling of indulgences, buying of spiritual positions, extortion of wealth, etc.

I think the Reformation had good and bad effects. The division probably was not God’s will, but He brings good out of evil. The Protestant Reformation was able to bring about an internal Reformation - within the Church.

I have a different perspective here C1S. Most certainly God can make a greater good come out of evil but I think it is faulty to conclude that the Protestant Reformation was the thing that was able to bring about an internal reformation of the Catholic Church. Luther was an opportunist. The Catholic Church was in fact already working on internal reformations but was slow in moving on them since there were major wars being fought by the various nations and the timing was wrong to bring them all to the table when they had these ongoing secular conflicts. It is extremely ironic that Luther decides to rebel 6 months AFTER the Church had already convened its first meetings to self-reform some know areas of abuse at the Fifth Lateran Council. Luther KNEW that change was in the air and he still purposely got in the middle of it to meddle at a very bad time when the Turks were on the border armed to the teeth ready to start a war with all of Christendom. It is incalculable what Luther’s insubordination caused to entire nations and The Church. He could not have picked a worse time to start divisions among the Christian Kings and divide loyalties. Luther was a wrecking ball - an utter disaster. If The Church could survive Luther it can survive anything imaginable. The only thing positive I can see that came out of the reformation was to get weak Catholics out of the Church and purify it and to further develop dogma by using the reformers blatant theological errors as new anathemas to tighten up the true teachings.

The Fifth Lateran Council, sat from 1512 to 1517 under Popes Julius II and Leo X, the emperor being Maximilian I. Fifteen cardinals and about eighty archbishops and bishops took part in it. Its decrees are chiefly disciplinary. A new crusade against the Turks was also planned, but came to naught, owing to the religious upheaval in Germany caused by Luther.

James

 

[catholic1seeks]

I have a different perspective here C1S. Most certainly God can make a greater good come out of evil but I think it is faulty to conclude that the Protestant Reformation was the thing that was able to bring about an internal reformation of the Catholic Church. Luther was an opportunist. The Catholic Church was in fact already working on internal reformations but was slow in moving on them since there were major wars being fought by the various nations and the timing was wrong to bring them all to the table when they had these ongoing secular conflicts. It is extremely ironic that Luther decides to rebel 6 months AFTER the Church had already convened its first meetings to self-reform some know areas of abuse at the Fifth Lateran Council. Luther KNEW that change was in the air and he still purposely got in the middle of it to meddle at a very bad time when the Turks were on the border armed to the teeth ready to start a war with all of Christendom. It is incalculable what Luther’s insubordination caused to entire nations and The Church. He could not have picked a worse time to start divisions among the Christian Kings and divide loyalties. Luther was a wrecking ball - an utter disaster. If The Church could survive Luther it can survive anything imaginable. The only thing positive I can see that came out of the reformation was to get weak Catholics out of the Church and purify it and to further develop dogma by using the reformers blatant theological errors as new anathemas to tighten up the true teachings.

The Fifth Lateran Council, sat from 1512 to 1517 under Popes Julius II and Leo X, the emperor being Maximilian I. Fifteen cardinals and about eighty archbishops and bishops took part in it. Its decrees are chiefly disciplinary. A new crusade against the Turks was also planned, but came to naught, owing to the religious upheaval in Germany caused by Luther.

James

Yes. You’re right.

I was just thinking of the great Council of Trent.