Oh, maybe they do? I'm not sure. I thought they might take issue with the part that goes "I believe in one holy catholic and apostolic church", or something to that effect. But if you think about it it would be pretty unfounded. The Creed makes a point of wording catholic with a small c and not a capital c. A large C Catholic refers to the Roman Catholic church, but small c catholic refers to the Greek word to mean universal. Perhaps this would be why a Protestant church would accept it, but because the general public would assume that "catholic" meant the same as "Catholic" it is easy to see the problems that a Protestant church would have with it.
Seeing as I'm not sure what "Restorationists" believe, you would be correct to assume that I would not, at this point, accept the label. Also I wanted to apologize for my earlier statement; "Whereas those who have studied the Bible and the early church and base their lives on that and not on how they differ from the Catholic Church can not be considered to be Protestants." After rereading it, it seems to imply that you haven't studied the Bible or the early church and having discussed many topics with you, I know nothing could be farther from the truth.
The CofE has gone through periods of high church and low church and has now arrived at a dualistic identity with Anglo-Catholics and low church styles of worship and practice. yeah, the Nicene creeds ending does accuratly describe the Anglican church's view of itself.
Restorationist is a term that describes a Christian group that purports to "restore" the true Church started by Jesus. I can see some pejorative-ness in the statement that in someway the church was lost, but it seems to me that the beliefs and practices of the so-called Restorationists (I say so-called because I do not think they define themselves that way) if they even did exist during the era of the early Church, were invented during the last couple hundred years and have "no authority" (like the multiple false prophecies of the Watchtower people). PS- I know you are not one of the Watchtower people OWB, but they are a very good example for much of my points.
Just to let you know that I know this is kind of a side discussion but I find it interesting but I'm still looking into confession and will discuss that with you later. Anyway, I guess I'm not a Restorationist because I don't feel that the truth was ever "lost" and needs to be restored. But I do believe that "opressive Wolves" have entered into the Congregation and have mislead many. Thus there is much in what is generally called "Christianity" that is false and needs to be removed from what most call "Christianity". We've discussed this before and it seems that much of what I would call pagan doctrines and false worship you feel are okay because they are approved by "Apostolic succession" but I feel it is more along the lines of the traditions of men making the word of God invalid and I feel that they should have no part in Christian worship.
Yeah, it generally fits the LDS church best I think. (I also did more digging, and it doesn't have to say the church was "lost" but only that correct worship and beliefs were suppressed and they are being restored). I've been waiting for your reply. I think after you do, I will give a detailed explanation of the steps of Confession, or at least my experience of them.
Sorry about taking so long, I'm a bit of a procrastinator and when that part shows up I just have to humor it until it goes away, 'cause if I try to force it, it just gets stubborn and just wont go away.
So I figured I would give a breif outline on how I understand teh Sacrament of Penance: 1) The sacrament really "begins" in our hearts. If we realise we sin, then we feel it in our heart, how much it displeases God that we do sin. Or, we can engage in a regular examination of conscience http://frpat.com/examen.htm . Most of these are centred around the 10 commandments, but then expand into other areas as well. We then feel sorry for or actions, and want to be reconciled to God. 2) God to confession! this is when we say "bless me Father for I have sinned, it has been X since my last confession, these are my sins..." We do not go into detail (unless it may relate something important...like something that makes us not guilty), nor do we say of times we've been tempted, only those times we've fallen into sin. 3)Penance. the priest usually assigns Penance in the forms of prayers (say a decade of the Rosary, or 2 Our Fathers, or something), but it can sometimes also be a meditation on the Scripture or alms giving or something else. 4) Act of contrition. This is a formal declaration of your contrition because of your sins and because of the effect it has on your and god, not just because you do not want to go to Hell. 5) Absolution. the priest will say "May our Lord Jesus Christ absolve you; and by His authority I absolve you from every bond of excommunication and interdict, so far as my power allows and your needs require. [making the Sign of the Cross:] Thereupon, I absolve you of your sins in the name of the Father, and the Son, and the Holy Spirit. Amen." Absolution forgives the guilt associated with the penitent's sins, and removes the eternal punishment (Hell) associated with mortal sins. It is my understanding that the Penance, once carried out, removes the temporal effects (suffering) from the sins confessed. http://www.fisheaters.com/sampleconfession.html This is a sort of "script" of a fake confession.
Do you believe that it is right that a human has been given these powers to forgive? Should it not be for the Lord only to forgive our sins?
Here are a couple articles that I found that talk about confession: The Bible presents confession in this manner. Most important is confession to God. (Psalm 32:1-5) And the Christian disciple James wrote: “Is there anyone sick among you? Let him call the older men of the congregation to him, and let them pray over him, greasing him with oil in the name of Jehovah. Therefore openly confess your sins to one another and pray for one another, that you may get healed.”—James 5:14, 16. A Christian burdened with sin can call the congregation overseers, who can give personal and practical counsel from the Bible to help the wrongdoer abandon his sinful course. The overseers can give appropriate encouragement as they monitor the progress of the one who is ailing spiritually. Fortified by the personal assistance of congregation elders, repentant wrongdoers can gain the relief that David felt, as he expressed in a psalm: “My sin I finally confessed to you, and my error I did not cover. I said: ‘I shall make confession over my transgressions to Jehovah.’ And you yourself pardoned the error of my sins.”—Psalm 32:5. Confession of wrongdoing. The repentant person, then, humbles himself and seeks God’s face (2Ch 7:13, 14; 33:10-13; Jas 4:6-10), supplicating his forgiveness. (Mt 6:12) He is not like the self-righteous Pharisee of Jesus’ illustration but is like the tax collector whom Jesus portrayed as beating his breast and saying, “O God, be gracious to me a sinner.” (Lu 18:9-14) The apostle John states: “If we make the statement: ‘We have no sin,’ we are misleading ourselves and the truth is not in us. If we confess our sins, he is faithful and righteous so as to forgive us our sins and to cleanse us from all unrighteousness.” (1Jo 1:8, 9) “He that is covering over his transgressions will not succeed, but he that is confessing and leaving them will be shown mercy.”—Pr 28:13; compare Ps 32:3-5; Jos 7:19-26; 1Ti 5:24. Daniel’s prayer at Daniel 9:15-19 is a model of sincere confession, expressing prime concern for Jehovah’s name and basing its appeal “not according to our righteous acts . . . but according to your many mercies.” Compare, also, the humble expression of the prodigal son. (Lu 15:17-21) Sincerely repentant ones ‘raise their heart along with their palms to God,’ confessing their transgression and seeking forgiveness.—La 3:40-42. Confessing sins to one another. The disciple James counsels: “Openly confess your sins to one another and pray for one another, that you may get healed.” (Jas 5:16) Such confession is not because any human serves as “helper [“advocate,” RS]” for man with God, since Christ alone fills that role by virtue of his propitiatory sacrifice. (1Jo 2:1, 2) Humans, of themselves, cannot actually right the wrong toward God, on their own behalf or on behalf of others, being unable to provide the needed atonement. (Ps 49:7, 8) However, Christians can help one another, and their prayers on behalf of their brothers, while not having an effect on God’s application of justice (since Christ’s ransom alone serves to bring remission of sins), do count with God in petitioning his giving needed help and strength to the one who has sinned and is seeking aid. And this article: Confession Definition: A declaration or an acknowledgment, either publicly or in private, (1) of what a person believes or (2) of his sins. Sins that can be forgiven Heb. 10:26, JB: “If, after we have been given knowledge of the truth, we should deliberately commit any sins, then there is no longer any sacrifice for them.” Mark 3:29, JB: “Let anyone blaspheme against the Holy Spirit and he will never have forgiveness: he is guilty of an eternal sin.” How penance is to be shown Matt. 6:7, JB: “In your prayers do not babble [that is, utter in a meaninglessly repetitious manner] as the pagans do, for they think that by using many words they will make themselves heard.” Matt. 6:9-12, JB: “You should pray like this: ‘Our Father in heaven, . . . forgive us our debts.’” Rom. 12:9, JB: “Do not let your love be a pretence, but sincerely prefer good to evil.” Did not Jesus authorize his apostles to forgive sins? John 20:21-23, JB: “‘As the Father sent me, so am I sending you.’ After saying this he breathed on them and said: ‘Receive the Holy Spirit. For those whose sins you forgive, they are forgiven; for those whose sins you retain, they are retained.’” How did the apostles understand and apply this? There is no record in the Bible of a single instance in which an apostle listened to a private confession and then pronounced absolution. However, the requirements for being forgiven by God are set out in the Bible. The apostles, under the direction of holy spirit, could discern whether individuals were meeting such requirements and could on this basis declare that God had either forgiven them or not forgiven them. For examples, see Acts 5:1-11, also 1 Corinthians 5:1-5 and 2 Corinthians 2:6-8. What Does the Bible say about confession? Confessing one’s faith by public declaration Rom. 10:9, 10: “If you publicly declare that ‘word in your own mouth,’ that Jesus is Lord, and exercise faith in your heart that God raised him up from the dead, you will be saved. For with the heart one exercises faith for righteousness, but with the mouth one makes public declaration for salvation.” Matt. 10:32, 33: “Everyone, then, that confesses union with me [Jesus Christ] before men, I will also confess union with him before my Father who is in the heavens; but whoever disowns me before men, I will also disown him before my Father who is in the heavens.” When a person sins against God Matt. 6:6-12: “When you pray, go into your private room and, after shutting your door, pray to your Father who is in secret . . . ‘Our Father in the heavens, let your name be sanctified . . . and forgive us our debts, as we also have forgiven our debtors.’” Ps. 32:5: “My sin I finally confessed to you [God], and my error I did not cover. I said: ‘I shall make confession over my transgressions to Jehovah.’ And you yourself pardoned the error of my sins.” 1 John 2:1: “If anyone does commit a sin, we have a helper with the Father, Jesus Christ, a righteous one.” When an individual wrongs his fellowman or when he has been wronged Matt. 5:23, 24: “If, then, you are bringing your gift to the altar and you there remember that your brother has something against you, leave your gift there in front of the altar, and go away; first make your peace with your brother, and then, when you have come back, offer up your gift.” Matt. 18:15: “If your brother commits a sin, go lay bare his fault between you and him alone.” Luke 17:3: “If your brother commits a sin give him a rebuke, and if he repents forgive him.” Eph. 4:32: “Become kind to one another, tenderly compassionate, freely forgiving one another just as God also by Christ freely forgave you.” When someone becomes involved in serious wrongdoing and wants spiritual help Jas. 5:14-16: “Is there anyone [spiritually] sick among you? Let him call the older men of the congregation to him, and let them pray over him, greasing him with oil in the name of Jehovah. And the prayer of faith will make the indisposed one well, and Jehovah will raise him up. Also, if he has committed sins, it will be forgiven him [by God]. Therefore openly confess your sins to one another and pray for one another, that you may get healed.” Prov. 28:13: “He that is covering over his transgressions will not succeed, but he that is confessing and leaving them will be shown mercy.” What if persons who commit sins do not seek help? Gal. 6:1: “Brothers, even though a man takes some false step before he is aware of it, you who have spiritual qualifications try to readjust such a man in a spirit of mildness, as you each keep an eye on yourself, for fear you also may be tempted.” 1 Tim. 5:20: “Reprove before all onlookers [that is, those who personally know about the matter] persons who practice sin, that the rest also may have fear.” 1 Cor. 5:11-13: “Quit mixing in company with anyone called a brother that is a fornicator or a greedy person or an idolater or a reviler or a drunkard or an extortioner, not even eating with such a man. . . . ‘Remove the wicked man from among yourselves.’”
Well a few things: The priest does not forgive the sins himself. Any forgiveness is from God, and through the priest "in persona Christi" (in the person of Christ). The power of Christ to forgive sins was given to his apostles. this power is not inherent in them, by by virtue of Christ working through them. Also, there is a difference between forgiveness and absolution. Absolution is for "complete" then forgiveness. Absolution is the complete remission and declaring innocent of sins, whereas forgiveness says nothing about the effect of the sin (I think we all agree sin has effects)... An interesting page: http://wdtprs.com/blog/2009/03/quaeritur-i-forgive-instead-of-i-absolve/ Think of it this way. Let's say someone is convicted of a crime. He repents. The governor grants him a pardon. From the moment the governor speaks the words or signs the paper, he has been "forgiven" by the state. But he's still in prison until someone actually opens the doors and he can return to society. The governor's pardon doesn't "make" him free, it only allows him to become free. It's similar with confession. God forgives us (grants us a pardon) but we are still not reconciled to the Church until we've been absolved (someone opens the door and says "you can now return to society"). http://forums.catholic.com/showthread.php?p=5635491 There is also a thing in the church called "perfect contrition" in which we can be forgiven of our mortal sins outside of sacramental confession (this is important if you are dying but a priest cannot perform the final rites and hear confession) but the effects of the sin are still there so sacramental confession is still required to remove the effects of sin.
This doesn't answer what Jesus said to them means though. I does not mean that they can discern sin in others, because that is not what Jesus says.
There is an essential piece of the puzzle that is being overlooked here. We do not put new wine in old wine skins. If we do the skins burst and both the wine and the skin are ruined. I.e. The crucible of understanding, in this instance, "what Jesus meant" is lost as well as the true authority of what he spoke. The vintage of this "new wine" can be sampled in a single impassioned moment as Jesus drives the money changers from the temple. My fathers house is meant for all natures but you have turned it into a den of robbers and thieves. Understand, Gods house is the life of a man, the altar of God his heart. Jesus teaching on sin is this. Let he who is blameless cast the first stone. Every accusation you make against a brother or yourself is a false witness against your neighbor. He is child of God and we defile both the temple and the altar by proclaiming him guilty. We must condemn in order to justify our unwillingness to forgive.
Has anyone on this forum ever read anything about historical Jesus? http://www.amazon.com/Historical-Je...=sr_1_2?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1256920402&sr=1-2
Okay, then the question is how did they apply it? There is no record in the Bible of a single instance in which an apostle listened to a private confession and then pronounced absolution. Why not? If it is so important a feature of true worship, why weren't the apostles recorded in the Bible doing it, giving us an example? Why no record of them in the Bible passing it on to others?
Not that book, but I have studied (historical-critically) the Gospels and Jesus in them. My biggest problem with "the Quest" is that the gospels are not unbiased (although nothing is), but that they are imbued with wonder-works, and supernatural events that those looking for "truth in history" will over-look or dismiss for no other reason than "these things do not happen". the Jesus Seminar was based upon a coloured bean system where it was voted which sayings were "authentically" Jesus'. I study the historical Jesus, but I think it is impossible to remove him from the Gospels and that they proclaim. Also, this is not on the topic of the thread.
OK, I understand your viewpoint. I especially liked the analogy you used on jail. My question would be this then. It is correct to say that the apostles were given the authority to forgive sins, but how would priests today still have this authority if it has not been given to them personally by Christ? If one does not need personal authority by Christ to forgive sins, could any person claim to have this authority? Or do Catholics believe it is given to them upon becoming a priest?
Look up that particular book, i found it to be unlike any other i had read before. This is one of the main reasons i never get into debate about religion, especially with religious people. i respect your feelings but i don't share the same ground. mine is based on critical thinking and evidence rather than what my feelings would dictate me to accept for reality otherwise. Consequently, any debate with someone who mounts argument from different platform becomes meaningless in essence. i would only annoy or could even unintentionally offend you by stating my thoughts about subject in a matter of factly manner. and i would not be persuaded to accept for a fact what you have only your feelings to back up. In my critically thinking perception you don't create authenticity by mere voting. What if 99 out of 100 people who vote lack any , even basic, knowledge , of subject they are judging? Can you ask lay men to vote if they believe Bohr or Einstein's view on quantum mechanics phenomena to be more accurate? When authenticating something it's not so much numbers but experteese that really matters. It would take deep, lenghty study of facts, of whatever evidence is out there and then it would take even greater effort to make an analysis like you do in physics when you analyze the evidence. For instance, to understand the property of electron (you can't really see it in action) you take a plate upon which it had an impact and then by measuring the impact you ask what mass, size and velocity would be necessary to cause it and that's how you come to some conclusion about the property of matter that caused it. But again, i will not continue any argument about this subject with you. i respect your beliefs and you admit to base your opinions on religious feeling so i will leave it there. of course you can't . the difference is in how you read them. Ok, agreed. i was not going to continue this discussion anyway.
Upon being ordained by a bishop which are the direct successors of the apostles, the ordained priest receives this power (Remember Christ forgave sins as a man--yes he was God too, but he said that God gave the Son of Man the power) When Judas gave up his apostolic office, the 11 voted and elected a new apostle. This indicates that the office is transferable, and can be appointed to new people by the apostles themselves. St Paul too, even though he received a personal and direct vision of Christ, he still required the apostles to "lay their hands' on him. this is what bishops do to priests. Also, if Jesus gave this gift and authority to only his apostles, why would he have it die too at their deaths? We do believe in the "priesthood of all believers", but also in a specific ordained priesthood, with Christ as the high-priest. Thanks for the kudos on the analogy. To OWB: I will answer your post soon enough....
