*** I have been told that the priest has full discretion as to whether to grant absolution or not. For example, if a priest knows that Fred is an alcoholic, and Fred comes into confession and has obviously been drinking, then the priest can and SHOULD deny forgiveness and absolution. I have not been told that this kind of thing happens very often, however, the power is still there and that’s what I was talking about.***
If something like that is obvious, then it is true. But the priest who denies absolution because of some petty motive such as dislike for the individual, is, I believe, overruled by the Holy Spirit and forgiveness is given if the individual is truly repentent.
***Most FR Catholics I have spoken with, but not all, have said that it IS God who does the actual forgiving, but that the priest has the power to “block” the request from going through according to this passage.***
Of course, it is God. A man cannot stop God from doing as He will, either. If the man is truly repentent, the priest cannot ‘block’ the way.
***Let’s say that your car dies on you and you have it towed to your favorite mechanic, me. I examine the car and then I tell you “I promise I will have it fixed for you by tomorrow”. You come back the next day and I smile and tell you that the repairs went fine. You hop in and turn the key but nothing happens. Then you get out and ask me what’s going on. I smile again and say that I actually didn’t touch your car, but I have assembled all the tools you’ll need to fix it yourself. According to you I fully kept my promise to fix your car.***
Slow day? No, the analogy doesn’t work. Jesus is the WAY, the Truth and the Life. The Way. The Journey. Not the limousine. It is up to us to make that journey - and He makes it possible - it is impossible otherwise.
***Just for fun, let’s extend the analogy. :) Now, let’s say that the next time I actually do fix your car, just as I promised. You thank me and ask if my work is guaranteed. I say “Absolutely” and then hand you a certificate which says “Eternal Guarantee”. Well, after a while your car breaks down again and you bring it back. You present the “Eternal Guarantee” and expect me to fix it for free. I say “No way. You see, the Eternal Guarantee is only good until the next time your car breaks down. As soon as it breaks down, the Eternal Guarantee expires. Therefore, if you want it fixed you will have to pay full price” (confession/penance). Under Apostolic thought you have no problem with this and think it is perfectly fair. :)***
Eternal salvation is not a car wreck and the Guarantee comes with conditions - the Sermon on the Mount is a good place to start.
***While God does not call for it, He nonetheless knows that we are still going to sin because of the remnant of the old man. So, we give thanks that John tells us:***
You mean old man Adam? You bet. If the Reformed truly believe that they are following the guidance of the Holy Spirit, and they still sin, then the Holy Spirit is guiding the Reformed to sin. We don’t go there because we believe that God is not the author of sin. Man misses the target of God - this is sin.
***Only a weak God can fail. Only a God who is not omnipotent can fail. If your above is representative of Apostolic belief, then it also proves the belief that man can and DOES thwart God’s will. That is, the only explanation of God failing would be at the hands of man. Is this really the God whom you know?**
The God that we are familiar with has given free will to all. Including the free will to reject Him. If His will is that we have free will, then God does not fail.
The Reformed seem awful hung up on control issues.
As with my example, I would imagine such a thing happens very seldom. However, in the victim's mind he IS damned, even though the truth is otherwise. This potential is one reason I object to the power claimed.
FK: ***Let’s say that your car dies on you and you have it towed to your favorite mechanic, me. I examine the car and then I tell you “I promise I will have it fixed for you by tomorrow”. You come back the next day and I smile and tell you that the repairs went fine. You hop in and turn the key but nothing happens. Then you get out and ask me what’s going on. I smile again and say that I actually didn’t touch your car, but I have assembled all the tools you’ll need to fix it yourself. According to you I fully kept my promise to fix your car.***
Slow day? No, the analogy doesn’t work. Jesus is the WAY, the Truth and the Life. The Way. The Journey. Not the limousine. It is up to us to make that journey - and He makes it possible - it is impossible otherwise.
I don't see where you address my point at all. The Bible says (promises) that those who truly believe on Christ are saved. Yet, Catholicism says "maybe". My analogy compares the promise (scripture) with the reality in Catholicism (something very different).
FK: ***Just for fun, let’s extend the analogy. :) Now, let’s say that the next time I actually do fix your car, just as I promised. You thank me and ask if my work is guaranteed. I say “Absolutely” and then hand you a certificate which says “Eternal Guarantee”. Well, after a while your car breaks down again and you bring it back. You present the “Eternal Guarantee” and expect me to fix it for free. I say “No way. You see, the Eternal Guarantee is only good until the next time your car breaks down. As soon as it breaks down, the Eternal Guarantee expires. Therefore, if you want it fixed you will have to pay full price” (confession/penance). Under Apostolic thought you have no problem with this and think it is perfectly fair. :)***
Eternal salvation is not a car wreck and the Guarantee comes with conditions - the Sermon on the Mount is a good place to start.
Again, I do not see you addressing my point. The car breaking down again is analogous to the next mortal sin. That is, the thing that the guarantee is supposed to guarantee against. My point is that in Catholicism a guarantee is claimed (one is "eternally saved"), but it is actually meaningless since "eternally saved" can be wiped out with one mortal sin.
If the Reformed truly believe that they are following the guidance of the Holy Spirit, and they still sin, then the Holy Spirit is guiding the Reformed to sin.
That would apply to you too, unless you renounce that the Holy Spirit leads you. We do follow the guidance of the Holy Spirit, but not IN perfection since we still sin. That is no reflection on Holy Spirit. Besides, how can a Comforter comfort without leading?
The Reformed seem awful hung up on control issues.
Well, I will admit that I AM! :) To me, the sovereignty of God goes directly to His identity and our understanding of Him. It directly affects my life. If God is sovereign, then I can rest on His promises and seek to obey Him with confidence. If God has delegated away the powers most important concerning humans TO humans, then my eternal destiny is in a constant state of flux. Who knows where I will end up? I hope I do a good enough job, etc. It would also mean that God does not love me in the way I thought He did. Under the delegated powers system God would love me FAR FAR less than I love my own children. I.e., I would do serious jail time for at least reckless endangerment and child neglect/abuse if I treated my children the same way God treats His children under the Apostolic view. That's actually a scary thought to me. :) And I DO love my children very very much! :)