Confession

[OneLight]

I have to agree with you here. Confession to another human is not necessary for forgiveness but it isn't a bad thing to do. I never understood the whole punishment and hail mary thing. But I'm not a catholic either.

Lets remember how important it really is to live in forgiveness from another and for another. It is necessary to live as God would have us live.

Matthew 5:23-24

Therefore if you bring your gift to the altar, and there remember that your brother has something against you, leave your gift there before the altar, and go your way. First be reconciled to your brother, and then come and offer your gift.

When you know someone has something against you, even if it is from a false witness, inside your heart you are uneasy, unless your heart is cold, lacking love for that person. It is important to have a heart of flesh and love one another.

In Matthew 18:21-22, we read about the Parable of the Unforgiving Servant. Read what happens when we do not forgive another.

Then Peter came to Him and said,

[Christofine]

I am a Catholic and have been taught that during confession I confess to Jesus but through the person of the priest, and of course only Jesus can forgive.

And of course its all really about a self examination of conscience and sincere repentence or the whole exercise is a waste of time.

I must say that I am very disappointed at the nastiness coming from the hearts of some posters on this site towards Catholics.

It is not a truly non denominational site.

People parrot big chunks of scripture from here there and everywhere and I'm sure half of them have no idea what they're talking about.

Jesus had one simple commandment I thought, to love God with all our hearts and minds and love our neighbours like ourselves.

[Massorite]

I am a Catholic and have never understood why Catholics have to confess their sins to a priest. Wouldn't it be better to confess directly to Jesus and ask for forgiveness?

Matthew 23:9 "And call no man your father upon the earth: for One is your Father, Which is in heaven". Do you call your priest "priest" or do you call him "father"? When you go in to confess your sins do you say "forgive me priest for I have sinned" or do you say "forgive me father for I have sinned"?

Matthew 23:9 is talking about calling a man father as if he was "Father God". Back when the Universal church was trying to make the church more appealling to the pagans they created an institution whereby a person could physically confess to a man instead of an invisible God. BUT here is what I found in the Catholic encyclopedia New Advent under Summa Theologica

Article 1. Whether it is necessary to confess to a priest?

Objection 1. It would seem that it is not necessary to confess to a priest. For we are not bound to confession, except in virtue of its Divine institution. Now its Divine institution is made known to us (James 5:16): "Confess your sins, one to another," where there is no mention of a priest. Therefore it is not necessary to confess to a priest.

Objection 2. Further, Penance is a necessary sacrament, as is also Baptism. But any man is the minister of Baptism, on account of its necessity. Therefore any man is the minister of Penance. Now confession should be made to the minister of Penance. Therefore it suffices to confess to anyone.

Objection 3. Further, confession is necessary in order that the measure of satisfaction should be imposed on the penitent. Now, sometimes another than a priest might be more discreet than many priests are in imposing the measure of satisfaction on the penitent. Therefore it is not necessary to confess to a priest.

Objection 4. Further, confession was instituted in the Church in order that the rectors might know their sheep by sight. But sometimes a rector or prelate is not a priest. Therefore confession should not always be made to a priest.

On the contrary, The absolution of the penitent, for the sake of which he makes his confession, is imparted by none but priests to whom the keys are intrusted. Therefore confession should be made to a priest.

Further, confession is foreshadowed in the raising of the dead Lazarus to life. Now our Lord commanded none but the disciples to loose Lazarus (John 11:44). Therefore confession should be made to a priest.

I answer that, The grace which is given in the sacraments, descends from the Head to the members. Wherefore he alone who exercises a ministry over Christ's true body is a minister of the sacraments, wherein grace is given; and this belongs to a priest alone, who can consecrate the Eucharist. Therefore, since grace is given in the sacrament of Penance, none but a priest is the minister of the sacrament: and consequently sacramental confession which should be made to a minister of the Church, should be made to none but a priest.

Reply to Objection 1. James speaks on the presupposition of the Divine institutions: and since confession had already been prescribed by God to be made to a priest, in that He empowered them, in the person of the apostles, to forgive sins, as related in John 20:23, we must take the words of James as conveying an admonishment to confess to priests.

Reply to Objection 2. Baptism is a sacrament of greater necessity than Penance, as regards confession and absolution, because sometimes Baptism cannot be omitted without loss of eternal salvation, as in the case of children who have not come to the use of reason: whereas this cannot be said of confession and absolution, which regard none but adults, in whom contrition, together with the purpose of confessing and the desire of absolution, suffices to deliver them from everlasting death. Consequently there is no parity between Baptism and confession.

Reply to Objection 3. In satisfaction we must consider not only the quantity of the punishment but also its power, inasmuch as it is part of a sacrament. In this way it requires a dispenser of the sacraments, though the quantity of the punishment may be fixed by another than a priest.

Reply to Objection 4. It may be necessary for two reasons to know the sheep by sight. First, in order to register them as members of Christ's flock, and to know the sheep by sight thus belongs to the pastoral charge and care, which is sometimes the duty of those who are not priests. Secondly, that they may be provided with suitable remedies for their health; and to know the sheep by sight thus belongs to the man, i.e. the priest, whose business it is to provide remedies conducive to health, such as the sacrament of the Eucharist, and other like things. It is to this knowledge of the sheep that confession is ordained.

Article 2. Whether it is ever lawful to confess to another than a priest?

Objection 1. It would seem that it is never lawful to confess to another than a priest. For confession is a sacramental accusation, as appears from the definition given above (Question 7, Article 1). But the dispensing of a sacrament belongs to none but the minister of a sacrament. Since then the proper minister of Penance is a priest, it seems that confession should be made to no one else.

Objection 2. Further, in every court of justice confession is ordained to the sentence. Now in a disputed case the sentence is void if pronounced by another than the proper judge; so that confession should be made to none but a judge. But, in the court of conscience, the judge is none but a priest, who has the power of binding and loosing. Therefore confession should be made to no one else.

Objection 3. Further, in the case of Baptism, since anyone can baptize, if a layman has baptized, even without necessity, the Baptism should not be repeated by a priest. But if anyone confess to a layman in a case of necessity, he is bound to repeat his confession to a priest, when the cause for urgency has passed. Therefore confession should not be made to a layman in a case of necessity.

On the contrary, is the authority of the text (Sent. iv, D, 17).

I answer that, Just as Baptism is a necessary sacrament, so is Penance. And Baptism, through being a necessary sacrament has a twofold minister: one whose duty it is to baptize, in virtue of his office, viz. the priest, and another, to whom the conferring of Baptism is committed, in a case of necessity. In like manner the minister of Penance, to whom, in virtue of his office, confession should be made, is a priest; but in a case of necessity even a layman may take the place of a priest, and hear a person's confession.

Reply to Objection 1. In the sacrament of Penance there is not only something on the part of the minister, viz. the absolution and imposition of satisfaction, but also something on the part of the recipient, which is also essential to the sacrament, viz. contrition and confession. Now satisfaction originates from the minister in so far as he enjoins it, and from the penitent who fulfills it; and, for the fulness of the sacrament, both these things should concur when possible. But when there is reason for urgency, the penitent should fulfill his own part, by being contrite and confessing to whom he can; and although this person cannot perfect the sacrament, so as to fulfill the part of the priest by giving absolution, yet this defect is supplied by the High Priest. Nevertheless confession made to a layman, through lack* of a priest, is quasi-sacramental, although it is not a perfect sacrament, on account of the absence of the part which belongs to the priest. [Here and in the Reply to Objection 2 the Leonine edition reads "through desire for a priest".]

Reply to Objection 2. Although a layman is not the judge of the person who confesses to him, yet, on account of the urgency, he does take the place of a judge over him, absolutely speaking, in so far as the penitent submits to him, through lack of a priest.

Reply to Objection 3. By means of the sacraments man must needs be reconciled not only to God, but also to the Church. Now he cannot be reconciled to the Church, unless the hallowing of the Church reach him. In Baptism the hallowing of the Church reaches a man through the element itself applied externally, which is sanctified by "the word of life" (Ephesians 5:26), by whomsoever it is conferred: and so when once a man has been baptized, no matter by whom, he must not be baptized again. On the other hand, in Penance the hallowing of the Church reaches man by the minister alone, because in that sacrament there is no bodily element applied externally, through the hallowing of which grace may be conferred. Consequently although the man who, in a case of necessity, has confessed to a layman, has received forgiveness from God, for the reason that he fulfilled, so far as he could, the purpose which he conceived in accordance with God's command, he is not yet reconciled to the Church, so as to be admitted to the sacraments, unless he first be absolved by a priest, even as he who has received the Baptism of desire, is not admitted to the Eucharist. Wherefore he must confess again to a priest, as soon as there is one at hand, and the more so since, as stated above (ad 1), the sacrament of Penance was not perfected, and so it needs yet to be perfected, in order that by receiving the sacrament, the penitent may receive a more plentiful effect, and that he may fulfill the commandment about receiving the sacrament of Penance.

These are the reasons the Cotholic church gives for confessing sins to a priest but the bottom line in all of this is that "this is a bunch of garbage".

No where here do any of these rules talk about concessing our sins to Jesus. Yet in Matthew 6:6-9 the bible instructs us as such "But you when you pray enter into your closet (the confessional) and when you have shut the door pray to the Father Which is in secret; and your Father see's in secret shall reward you openly. ( in the Catholic church the father is the priest next door in the confessional) But when you pray use not vain repetitions (hale Mary's) as the heathen (pagan) do: for they think that they shall be heard for thier much speaking. Be not you therefore like them: for your Father knows what things you have need of before you ask Him. After this manner therefore pray you: Our Father Which are in Heaven, Hollowed be Your name".

So what we have here are man made instructions on how to ask for forgiveness for our sins to another man that we are supposed to call Father as in Father God. This is completly against the biblical instructions that I just quoted you from the bible and based on what the bible tells us. It is a sin to call any man born on this earth father as in Father God which is what is done when a priest is called "FATHER". It is a sin to confess our sins to any man who is not the Father or the Son who is human and here on this earth. And it is a sin and a pagan ritual to speak vain repititions like mother Angelica and her group of Nuns do every week on TV.

We should always confess our sins to Christ only and in secret.

Please no insult intended here. Just the facts.

[paul1149]

According to Catholicism a person cannot be saved unless they join the Catholic church. The confessional, hail Marys, and this, are among many other unbiblical beliefs/practices that make the Catholic church in grave error.

No that is not really true.

They believe that if you are born a Protestant and taught in that Church you can go to heaven. But you are correct in that they believe that only their Church is the fullness of the Church established by Christ. So a Christian would be missing out by not joining them at some level.

Yes. That is true. Outside the one holy Roman Catholic and Apostolic Church there is no salvation.

To put a little finer point on it, the RCC teaches that joining the church is necessary for salvation if one understands that it is the one true church. They also teach that all other valid churches are subsumed in the RCC.

[paul1149]

Jesus did give the church the power to pronounce the forgiveness of sins.

Would you please tell me where to find this in the gospel.

Mt 16.19, 18.18, Jn 20.23 for starters.

Mt.16:19 Is about the authority given to the Apostles to teach and preach the gospel. Albert Barnes Comm. It was not to forgive individuals, but to establish in all churches the terms and conditions on which men might be.

Adam Clark Comm. When the Jews made a man a doctor of law, they put into his hand a key of a closet in the temple where the sacred books were kept, and also tablets to write upon, signifying, by this, that they gave him the authority to teach and explain the scriptures.

Binding and loosing were terms in frequent use among the Jews, and that they meant binding or forbidding, granting or refusing, declaring lawful or unlawful, this is in reference to John20:23

Authority is given to determine who is worthy to be a member of the church( see Isaiah 22:22).

How can a priest or minister know a man's heart and determine whether he is worthy of forgiveness.

Almighty God through the, one time only, sacrifice ,made by our Lord Christ Jesus, accepts this payment in atonement for the sins of all mankind. Why then, would a priest, able to forgive sin( as you say), require penance, when God Almighty Himself does not require the same?

Acts6:6 Albert Barnes, Among the Jews it was customary to lay hands on the head of a person who was set apart to any particular office(Nu,27:18) also (Ac.8:19). This was done, not to impart any power or ability, but to designate that they received their authority or commission, from those who laid their hands on them...

2Timothy1:6 Albert Barnes, that thou stir up the gift of God,, That thou kindle as a fire, the original word here denotes the kindling of a fire. The idea is, that Timothy was to use all proper means to keep the flame of pure religion in the soul burning, and more particularly his zeal in the great cause to which he had been set apart.

which is in thee by putting on of my hands, In connection with the presbytery(see 1Ti4:14). This proves that Paul took part in the ordination of Timothy, but it does not prove either that he performed the duty alone, or that the " ordaining virtue ", whatever it was, was imparted by him only, for it is expressly said in 1 Ti 4:14, that he was ordained by the laying on of the hands of the presbytery, of which Paul was doubtless one....

2Timothy2:2 Brethren commentary...From the concluding part of the verse " who shall be able to teach others also ", it is implied that the ' things " here alluded to include all things Paul had taught him pertaining to the doctrines of the Christian religion and how he should conduct himself as a minister of Christ.

On verse 2 Adam Clarke says this.. but where is the uninterrupted apostolic succession. Who can tell? Probably it does not exist on the face of the world. All pretensions to it by certain churches are as stupid as they are idle and futile. He who appeals to this for his authority as a Christian minister, had best sit down till he has made it out....

Titus1:5..John Wesley, Ordain Elders- Appoint the most faithful, zealous men to watch over the rest. Their character follows, Titus1:6-9. These were the elders, or bishops, that Paul approved of, men that had living faith, a pure conscience, a blameless life.

I consulted more than the commentaries I quoted above. Consistent throughout was the declaration that only God can forgive sin and that the authority given to the church was to teach and preach the gospel and to maintain the truth in the teaching.

Thanks, but I'm not interested in interpretations and a barrage of commentary. If someone comes to me broken by sin and repentant, I'm going to take up my God-given role as Christ's ambassador and tell them on the authority of Scripture that God forgives them and wants to restore.

[leoxiii]

To put a little finer point on it, the RCC teaches that joining the church is necessary for salvation if one understands that it is the one true church. They also teach that all other valid churches are subsumed in the RCC.

Here is a link to the dogmatic definition of "Extra Ecclesiam Nulla Salis":

http://catholicism.org/cantate-domino.html

It is the last paragraph.

I will be away until late Wed. or Thur. If the Mods allow us to, and if you wish it, we can discuss it further then.

[Smalcald]

I am a Catholic and have been taught that during confession I confess to Jesus but through the person of the priest, and of course only Jesus can forgive.

And of course its all really about a self examination of conscience and sincere repentence or the whole exercise is a waste of time.

I must say that I am very disappointed at the nastiness coming from the hearts of some posters on this site towards Catholics.

It is not a truly non denominational site.

People parrot big chunks of scripture from here there and everywhere and I'm sure half of them have no idea what they're talking about.

Jesus had one simple commandment I thought, to love God with all our hearts and minds and love our neighbours like ourselves.

I hope I don't sound nasty. Maybe my post did?

The Catholic Church is an important Christian Church and needs in my opinion to be healthy and strong, I would like to see it live up to its true calling which I don't think it is right now. What I mean is do Catholics know what their faith is about, do they have a personal faith in Christ? Many do I totally agree, but I am often astounded at the many who know nothing about even the basics of very elemental Catholic beliefs and worse fundamental Christian beliefs about who Jesus is and what Scripture says. It is hard to defend a Christian denomination which claims to be the only true Christian Church, which is what the Catholic faith teaches, unlike most Protestant Churches.

Just so you know this site has a statement of faith and I think most informed Catholics would disagree with some of that statement of faith, essentially this is indeed a Protestant site, and I know people on this board itself will disagree with that; but you should really know that, and yes there are some very deep anti-Catholic biases you will see present here. I hope you would stay and post though if nothing else to clear up misconceptions about what Catholics believe or not.

Although once again confession is interesting in that the vast majority of Catholics in the US don't go to confession, ever. How do you explain Ted Kennedy getting a full Funeral Mass in good standing with the Church, while he was a lifelong and un-reptentent supporter of abortion rights? I guess for most of us it is not the teachings so much as the rank hypocrisy shown.

[Hunterpoet]

Jesus did give the church the power to pronounce the forgiveness of sins.

Would you please tell me where to find this in the gospel.

Mt 16.19, 18.18, Jn 20.23 for starters.

Mt.16:19 Is about the authority given to the Apostles to teach and preach the gospel. Albert Barnes Comm. It was not to forgive individuals, but to establish in all churches the terms and conditions on which men might be.

Adam Clark Comm. When the Jews made a man a doctor of law, they put into his hand a key of a closet in the temple where the sacred books were kept, and also tablets to write upon, signifying, by this, that they gave him the authority to teach and explain the scriptures.

Binding and loosing were terms in frequent use among the Jews, and that they meant binding or forbidding, granting or refusing, declaring lawful or unlawful, this is in reference to John20:23

Authority is given to determine who is worthy to be a member of the church( see Isaiah 22:22).

How can a priest or minister know a man's heart and determine whether he is worthy of forgiveness.

Almighty God through the, one time only, sacrifice ,made by our Lord Christ Jesus, accepts this payment in atonement for the sins of all mankind. Why then, would a priest, able to forgive sin( as you say), require penance, when God Almighty Himself does not require the same?

Acts6:6 Albert Barnes, Among the Jews it was customary to lay hands on the head of a person who was set apart to any particular office(Nu,27:18) also (Ac.8:19). This was done, not to impart any power or ability, but to designate that they received their authority or commission, from those who laid their hands on them...

2Timothy1:6 Albert Barnes, that thou stir up the gift of God,, That thou kindle as a fire, the original word here denotes the kindling of a fire. The idea is, that Timothy was to use all proper means to keep the flame of pure religion in the soul burning, and more particularly his zeal in the great cause to which he had been set apart.

which is in thee by putting on of my hands, In connection with the presbytery(see 1Ti4:14). This proves that Paul took part in the ordination of Timothy, but it does not prove either that he performed the duty alone, or that the " ordaining virtue ", whatever it was, was imparted by him only, for it is expressly said in 1 Ti 4:14, that he was ordained by the laying on of the hands of the presbytery, of which Paul was doubtless one....

2Timothy2:2 Brethren commentary...From the concluding part of the verse " who shall be able to teach others also ", it is implied that the ' things " here alluded to include all things Paul had taught him pertaining to the doctrines of the Christian religion and how he should conduct himself as a minister of Christ.

On verse 2 Adam Clarke says this.. but where is the uninterrupted apostolic succession. Who can tell? Probably it does not exist on the face of the world. All pretensions to it by certain churches are as stupid as they are idle and futile. He who appeals to this for his authority as a Christian minister, had best sit down till he has made it out....

Titus1:5..John Wesley, Ordain Elders- Appoint the most faithful, zealous men to watch over the rest. Their character follows, Titus1:6-9. These were the elders, or bishops, that Paul approved of, men that had living faith, a pure conscience, a blameless life.

I consulted more than the commentaries I quoted above. Consistent throughout was the declaration that only God can forgive sin and that the authority given to the church was to teach and preach the gospel and to maintain the truth in the teaching.

Thanks, but I'm not interested in interpretations and a barrage of commentary. If someone comes to me broken by sin and repentant, I'm going to take up my God-given role as Christ's ambassador and tell them on the authority of Scripture that God forgives them and wants to restore.

If someone were to come to me broken by sin and repentant, as Christ's ambassador I would tell them the same. But thats not what we are discussing.

Actually it is ...God forgives them, not a priest, rabbi or minister, but God, and only those with a contrite and repentant heart...because only God can see the heart.

And this forgiveness only comes by way of the cross, through Christ Jesus.

The scriptures I researched are the ones you listed in response to my question as to how you justified a priest's ability to forgive sin and the apostolic succession, in which I found no support for such a claim.

In this thread I have seen it stated that salvation can only be received if you belong to the one true church, meaning the RCC, I would be interested to know the scriptures used to support this claim. I need to know how my understanding of the sacrifice my Lord and Savior made ,by God's Grace, is no longer a free gift, but dependent upon my membership and the approval of the catholic church.

I need to understand why catholic priests are called father, when the scriptures clearly prohibit us from doing so.

I need to understand what scriptures encourage God's children to pray to any other being except Him.

i need to understand how a church, any church, can demand things for God's gifts beyond that which God requires.

[OneLight]

To put a little finer point on it, the RCC teaches that joining the church is necessary for salvation if one understands that it is the one true church. They also teach that all other valid churches are subsumed in the RCC.

Here is a link to the dogmatic definition of "Extra Ecclesiam Nulla Salis":

http://catholicism.org/cantate-domino.html

It is the last paragraph.

I will be away until late Wed. or Thur. If the Mods allow us to, and if you wish it, we can discuss it further then.

As this site does not allow any bashing of other denominations, I do hope you approach every subject the same way. We are to show love to one another, not condemnation by telling them that they are not believers.

I do hope that you continue to discuss what is and is not allowed here with every servant that is on board at the time. I predict that if you do not refrain from telling us that we are bound to hell because we do not attend the RCC, the gloves will come off and these threads will be shut down.

[Massorite]

I am a Catholic and have been taught that during confession I confess to Jesus but through the person of the priest, and of course only Jesus can forgive.

And of course its all really about a self examination of conscience and sincere repentance or the whole exercise is a waste of time.

I must say that I am very disappointed at the nastiness coming from the hearts of some posters on this site to wards Catholics.

It is not a truly non denominational site.

People parrot big chunks of scripture from here there and everywhere and I'm sure half of them have no idea what they're talking about.

Jesus had one simple commandment I thought, to love God with all our hearts and minds and love our neighbors like ourselves.

So how logical is it to go through the priest who is acting as an intercessor to the only biblically authorized intercessor when you can skip the priest and go directly to Christ? How do you know that the priest is going to or can correctly express how you feel to Jesus?

The problem here is that you were "taught" that you can confess your sins "through" the priest instead of going directly to Christ who died for your sins. Did the priest or shed blood for your sins? No! You know how the words get messed up when they are spoken from ear to ear and the more ears the more the message gets messed up. Read the bible and it will tell you that if you want Jesus to forgive you of your sins ask him and not some man made rep who can not forgive your sins. Because other wise Jesus will never hear your requests and your sins will go un-forgiven because you asked the wrong man for forgiveness.