Posted on 01/27/2006 8:26:48 AM PST by NYer
I don't think otherwise.
We are not prohibited from using logic. If we are to accept as a given that sacramental confession is what is "vaguely" supported in Scripture, it follows that such conversations must be kept in confidence. Companies do not do business with each other without legal "non-disclosure" agreements about insider information or company "secrets" that may be revealed.
SD
"Whose sins you shall forgive, they are forgiven; whose sins you shall retain, they are retained."
Yeah, that DOES come pretty close, doesn't it?
Stick to minerals, man.
The CE article clearly and unambiguously refutes that claim. I suggest that you retract it.
Your claim regarding the SEAL of the confessional may have some merit ... but as you know the Church rejects the protestant doctrine of sola scriptura, so who cares?
"The CE article clearly and unambiguously refutes that claim. I suggest that you retract it.
Your claim regarding the SEAL of the confessional may have some merit ... but as you know the Church rejects the protestant doctrine of sola scriptura, so who cares?"
(1) above is simply madness, refusal to see what is in black and white right before your eyes.
(2) and (3) above are part of the dispute between Catholics and protestants.
The literal meaning of your statement "Indeed, there's no Biblical support for the Sacrament of Confession" is (1) above. If that is what you mean ... I can't help you. I'm not a psychiatrist. If you mean (2) or (3) above ... I suggest saying what you mean. "No support" does not mean the same thing as "inadequate support" or "wrongly interpreted support".
bttt
Since this is largely a hypothetical question anyway, we can suppose lots of things. Certainly someone who is seeking to avoid capture would not usually be looking for a priest to offer absolution. Regardless of whether it is the priest or themselves who must initiate the police proceedings.
I think the confessional serves its purpose for those who are coming to grips with their sin/crime and want to know that forgiveness is available. A priest acting in confession often acts as the voice of conscience. A grave sinner may come to hear the priest say what he knows deep in his heart must be done.
SD
There is no Biblical support for the seal of the confessional. Indeed, there's no Biblical support for the Sacrament of Confession.
Can some of my learned friends in the Catholic Caucus correct this misinformation?
As a fallen Catholic, I have only one thing to say about this, and that is that the Bible says to "Obey the laws of the land," and to "render unto Caesar that which is Caesar's." Therefore, if Caesar wants to know when a child molester confesses, if it is the law of the land, the priest has to go along with it.
And where is the Frank family hiding?
SD
Here are two good summarizations of the support for Confession being a sacrament on the basis of Scripture and Apostolic Tradition.
http://www.scripturecatholic.com/confession.html
http://www.ourcatholicfaith.org/sacraments/penance.html
OTOH, MineralMan is correct that the Seal of Confession is based upon Catholic Canon Law governing the behavior of priests. It was doubtless an ancient custom -- it is hard to imagine the sacrament without it -- but the earliest written codifications I can find via the web seem to those of Gratian (c.1151) and the Fourth Lateran Council (1215). Gratian worked with older documents, but this article does not what they might be; one would need to look at the "Decretum" itself to find the citation.
http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/13649b.htm
Ouch!
Then we should also remove the spousal and attorney's exemptions, perhaps for other crimes as well as this.
And I appreciate that!
Christ granted forgiveness to the thief on the cross but the thief still suffered a just death for his earthly crimes. Consider the effects on the souls of the children who have been abused who may ultimately reject Christ, blaming him for the harm done to them by such abusers. Doesn't Paul adjure all Christians to follow the laws of their kings and magistrates? What puts the priests above such laws?
A priest may hear confession of such an abuser and advise him to repentence. But could it be credibly argued that for a priest to not report such a crime is to collude with the criminal?
Still the question would be upon what questions would you draw the lines of confidentiality...a man who confesses his infidelity of marriage, should not the priest then speak with the unknowing spouse on the same principle of honesty or integrity? How about the teen that steals money from his dad's wallet?
If the Catholics claim the church can announce rules and traditions based on Christ's speaking of the "loosening or binding" power granted the church, then the Catholics had better issue a "binding" regulation command that its priests report child abusers, lest God tie a millstone around the necks of the entire Catholic apparatus and cast it into the the sea...as Christ stated should happen to those who hurt his "little ones"!
Tell us where the runaway slaves are hiding. Tell us now.
(Honestly, does anyone around here even think about what they are writing? Is it really a Biblical principle to follow all laws blindly?)
SD
Nowhere.
There is no Biblical support for the seal of the confessional. Indeed, there's no Biblical support for the Sacrament of Confession.
This is a breath of fresh air and needed to be said.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.