Posted on 08/18/2011 7:18:16 AM PDT by marshmallow
So why is the seal of confession inviolable? Why does the seal bind under such a grave obligation that the Church excommunicates any confessor who directly violates it? (See: The seal of confession: some basics)
There are two principal reasons why the priest must preserve the seal: the virtue of justice and the virtue of religion. The motive of justice is evident because the penitent, by the very fact of entering the confessional, or asking the priest to hear his confession (we’ll deal with “reconciliation rooms” another day) rightly expects that the priest will observe the seal. This is a contract entered into by the fact of the priest agreeing to hear a person’s confession. To mandate the violation of the seal is in effect to prohibit the celebration of the sacrament of Penance.
Much more grave than the obligation of justice towards the penitent is the obligation of religion due to the sacrament. The Catholic Encyclopaedia gives a brief explanation of the virtue of religion which essentially summarises the teaching of St Thomas Aquinas. (Summa Theologica 2a 2ae q.81) Religion is a moral virtue by which we give to God what is His due; it is, as St Thomas says, a part of justice. In the case of the sacrament of Penance, instituted by Christ, Fr Felix Cappello explains things well [my translation]:
By the very fact that Christ permitted, nay ordered, that all baptised sinners should use the sacrament and consequently make a secret confession, he granted an absolutely inviolable right, transcending the order of natural justice, to use this remedy. Therefore the knowledge which was their own before confession, after the communication made in confession, remains their own for every non-sacramental use, and that by a power altogether sacred, which no contrary human law can strike out, since every human law is of an inferior order: whence this right cannot be taken away or overridden by any means, or any pretext, or any motive.
The penitent confesses his sins to God through the priest. If the seal were to be broken under some circumstances, it would put people off the sacrament and thereby prevent them from receiving the grace that they need in order to repent and amend their lives. It would also, and far more importantly, obstruct the will of God for sinners to make use of the sacrament of Penance and thereby enjoy eternal life. The grace of the sacrament is absolutely necessary for anyone who commits a mortal sin. To mandate the violation of the seal is in effect to prohibit the practice of the Catholic faith. Some secular commentators have spoken of the seal of confession as being somehow a right or privilege of the priest. That is a preposterous misrepresentation: it is a sacred and inviolable duty that the priest must fulfil for the sake of the penitent and for the sake of God's will to redeem sinners.
A possibly misleading phrase in this context is where theologians say that the penitent is confessing his sins as if to God "ut Deo." (You can easily imagine secularists deriding the idea that the priest makes himself to be a god etc.) In truth, the penitent is confessing his sins before God. The priest acts as the minister of Christ in a sacred trust which he may not violate for any cause - precisely because he is not in fact God. By virtue of the penitent’s confession ut Deo, the priest absolves the penitent and, if mortal sin is involved, thereby readmits him to Holy Communion.
There will be more to follow on the sacrament of confession. As I mentioned in my previous post, this series is not intended as a guide for making a devout confession but rather as an introduction to some canonical and theological questions regarding the sacrament which have become important recently. (For a leaflet on how to make a good confession, see my parish website.)
I have been told that the threat in Ireland to introduce a law compelling priests to violate the seal of confession has been withdrawn, at least for the time being. Nevertheless, I will continue with these posts because I think that the Irish proposal will be picked up by other secularists and may pose a problem for us. Further posts will look at the proper place, time and vesture for hearing confessions, one or two more particular crimes in canon law, the question of jurisdiction and the much misused expression “Ecclesia supplet”, and, of course, what to do if the civil authority tries to compel a priest to break the seal.
So when you say "Heaven is a physical place," you can't or won't say what you mean. Fine, but then there's nothing there either to believe or to doubt. You might as well say "bar bar bar."
And of course, this demonstrates the same error as those who think that when Jesus says what is translated as "vain repetition" that means that ALL repetition is vain. But Psalm 136 is full of repetition, thus demonstrating that at least SOME repetition is divinely inspired.
The kind of human wisdom that Paul spoke against was the bizarre gnostic schematic mystery religion which was influenced by perversions of neo-Platonism and the indigenous mystery religions. It is interesting that the leading neo-Platonist, Plotinus, wrote against the gnostics even though he was not a Christian.
So your stand comes down to "I say that heaven is a physical place but I don't care to be able to say what that means."
It ends up being like the martyrdom of Stephen in that your side ends up gnashing their teeth at us. The difference is that we come without words of wisdom but only with the weakness of questions.
After His ascension and until His second coming to establish His Kingdom, He gave Paul a commission: "Howbeit for this cause I obtained mercy, that in me FIRST Jesus Christ might shew forth all longsuffering, for a PATTERN TO THEM WHO SHOULD HEREAFTER BELIEVE ON HIM TO LIFE EVERLASTING." 1 Tim. 1:16.
If you were born before Paul and before Christ ascended into Heaven, Peter and the 11 would be the pattern you would follow for life everlasting. You would be following the Gospel of the Kingdom, commissioned by Christ.
If you were born after Paul was given his commission by the Risen Christ, you would be following the Gospel of the Grace of God, for a pattern for life everlasting.
Paul's importance is no more or less important than Peter and the 11. They were both given specific commissions for specific people for specific purposes. One concerns a Kingdom of believers, and the other concerns a Body of believers. All following Christ and having faith in His promises to them. The point is to understand WHICH promises are to a kingdom of believers and WHICH promises are to a body of believers.
Believing that is not the same as understanding the Bible.
Further, if you believe that, then it must be that you consider yourself called and equipped to teach. For Paul says NOT ALL are teachers, yet you are putting yourself forward as one who can pronounce on these things.
Yet when asked what you mean by saying "Heaven is a physical place," you abuse the person asking.
You call that teaching?
Maybe that's what being an intellectual does for you (assuming you classify yourself as an intellectual)...
When Jesus says,
Joh 14:2 In my Father's house are many mansions: if it were not so, I would have told you. I go to prepare a place for you.
Joh 14:3 And if I go and prepare a place for you, I will come again, and receive you unto myself; that where I am, there ye may be also.
I had no problem understanding that...I didn't sit around wondering what Jesus meant by a mansion, or a place or that where Jesus is, I will be there also...
Amen...
Charity rejoiceth not at evil but rejoiceth in the good. You are laughing at what you take to be being deceived. Therefore you are rejoicing at evil and are not following the inerrant Scriptures OR you think being deceived is good.
Indeed...
Who is this who darkens counsel with words without knowledge? -- Job
Matthew 13: 13* c This is why I speak to them in parables, because ‘they look but do not see and hear but do not listen or understand.’ 14d Isaiah’s prophecy is fulfilled in them, which says: ‘You shall indeed hear but not understand you shall indeed look but never see. 15Gross is the heart of this people, they will hardly hear with their ears, they have closed their eyes, lest they see with their eyes and hear with their ears and understand with their heart and be converted, and I heal them.’ * 16e “But blessed are your eyes, because they see, and your ears, because they hear. 17Amen, I say to you, many prophets and righteous people longed to see what you see but did not see it, and to hear what you hear but did not hear it.
Hearing and seeing does not equate to understanding.
The Religion Moderator can clear this up pretty quickly. I recall from an old evolution thread that the religion moderator identified and warned a FReeper for adding inflammatory keywords.
I had no problem understanding that.
SO you say. But since you do not explain it, I have only your word to go on, and you would discourage me from following men. So I don't know whether you understand it or not.
So you also have the charism of teaching?
Seems like a lot of fear on this thread.
That is my recollection also. And there is no need to try to trash an entire group, boatbums, all of the protestants are apparently taking responsibility for the inflammatory keywords since the one who did it is keeping silent.
As far as inside information goes, I have none. None is necessary. Whoever the FReeper is, the RM knows.
What I am convinced of is that after the Rapture, the church as well as the Holy Spirit will be gone...That is not to say that the Holy Spirit will not influence many during the Tribulation...Just as he has prior to the church, by landing ON individuals as opposed to indwelling them during the church age...
The teachings of Jesus within the Gospels did not include the leading of the Holy Spirit during the church age...
Those living during the Tribulation will still need instruction...The Pauline epistles will have no doctrinal value since they are written for the church...
As one can easily see, the Gospels were written to the Jew, the sheep of the house of Israel...These will become front and center for the Jews spoken of in Romans 9-11 during the Tribulation...
Again, as one can see, the book of Hebrews was written to-the Hebrews...
James was addressed to the 12 Tribes which are scattered abroad...
While there are so many things in ALL the books of the NT that apply to Christians spiritually, doctrinally some of them are written for the Jew who will live thru the Tribulation who go on into the Millennial reign of Jeus Christ...
1st Peter is addressed to the strangers scattered about the area of the Holy Land...These strangers are spoken of in Hebrews 11:13 and will again come to the forefront when the times of the Gentiles has been fulfilled, Rom. 11...
I realize I am the tiniest of a minority at FR who believes these things but doesn't matter...
The bible is so full of information and truth that is overlooked by most people in my estimation...All I can say is, what a book...
Believing that is not the same as understanding the Bible.
No, but it is the key...How will God teach you if you don't believe Him???
So what is your source of understanding for the scriptures???
Posters who are not Religion Forum "regulars" - even oldtimers - sometimes need a nudge to adjust to our decorum here.
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.