Posted on 01/11/2015 12:54:31 PM PST by NYer
Freedom of speech is a great thing. Unfortunately, it comes at an unavoidable price: When citizens are free to say what they want, theyll sometimes use that freedom to say some pretty silly things. And thats the case with the 12 claims were about to cover.
Some of them are made over and over, others are rare. Either way, while the proponents of these errors are free to promote them, we as Catholics have a duty to respond.
5. "You don't need to confess your sins to a priest. You can go straight to God."
As a former Baptist minister, I can understand the Protestant objection to confession (they have a different understanding of priesthood). But for a Catholic to say something like this...it's disappointing. I suspect that, human nature being what it is, people just don't like telling other people their sins, and so they come up with justifications for not doing so.
The Sacrament of Confession has been with us from the beginning, coming from the words of Christ Himself:
"Jesus said to them again, 'Peace be with you. As the Father has sent me, even so I send you.' And when he had said this, he breathed on them, and said to them, 'Receive the Holy Spirit. If you forgive the sins of any, they are forgiven; if you retain the sins of any, they are retained." (John 20:21-23)
Notice that Jesus gives His apostles the power to forgive sins. Of course, they wouldn't know which sins to forgive if they weren't told what sins were involved.
The practice of confession is also evident in the Letter Of James:
"Is any among you sick? Let him call for the elders of the church, and let them pray over him, anointing him with oil in the name of the Lord; and the prayer of faith will save the sick man, and the Lord will raise him up; and if he has committed sins, he will be forgiven. Therefore confess your sins to one another, and pray for one another, that you may be healed." (James 5:14-16)
It's interesting that nowhere does James (or Jesus) tell us to confess our sins to God alone. Rather, they seem to think that forgiveness comes through some means of public confession.
And it's not difficult to understand why. You see, when we sin, we rupture our relationship not just with God, but with His Body, the Church (since all Catholics are interconnected as children of a common Father). So when we apologize, we need to do so to all parties involved God and the Church.
Think of it this way. Imagine you walk into a store and steal some of their merchandise. Later, you feel remorse and regret the sinful act. Now, you can pray to God to forgive you for breaking His commandment. But there's still another party involved; you'll need to return the merchandise and make restitution for your action.
It's the same way with the Church. In the confessional, the priest represents God and the Church, since we've sinned against both. And when he pronounces the words of absolution, our forgiveness is complete.
Also, I don't think you do know where I'm coming from...or we would not have such disagreement. Furthermore the Christ you say salvation comes from is quetionable if we're talking about the Christ of the Bible or the catholic Christ. I see two different ones presented on these threads so one is a counterfeit.....and dressed to impress.
As for where you might meet....I promise...I will be coming back with the King of Kings and The God of Glory riding with Him and the Armies of Heaven.
Indeed....
The worst enemy of Christianity is not so much the cults as it is false religions who appear right...but wrong and deadly.
May we all meet together in Heaven!
You missed the point entirely unfortunately.
....”Rome has a different jesus, and a different gospel”...
Yes, it certainly appears and evidences so. Also seems their belief that because RCC has been around for so long it just has to be “the one”...when in fact even Islam has been around for eons so that is no argument which thy try to make.
One thing we do know...their comebacks have been almost as indoctrinated as their other teachings. I did not realize that RCC actually teaches their members how to play victim until I had read many of their sites and literature. And yet again found it stunning to discover this about catholicism.
Finally I began to look at it as it is rather than what i had hoped otherwise that one might find the gospel actually being presented via it’s Priests and or clergy. Stunned to find how rare it is even referenced on the Popes Site.
Thank you! What a treasure trove!
**One of the problems G2G is that Rome has a different jesus, and a different gospel .. **
This is not true. Where do you get this misinformation? A pamphlet?
Here is the truth:
“One Lord, One Faith, One Baptism.” Ephesians 4:5
Actually, Muhammed began his public life around the beginning of the 7 th century.
This is what I believe. It is twice now that you have doubted my understanding of the topics of which we have spoken. It is because we come from two different places: mine, with the Catholic Church; yours Sola Scriptura, from what I can see. The Father's House has many mansions. I may be no scholar, but I believe that God loves me, as He loves you.
Again, I assert, no one has a monopoly on Heaven!
Rome's Gospel is not based on Scripture alone. If one does not follow the Church, and each interprets Scripture accordion to ones own ideas, not only shall it differ from that of the Church, but that of each individual interpreter. Thus our concepts of Jesus differ.
And I believe the Holy Spirit guides the teachings of the Catholic Churches, East and West.
Not the same spirit as the Holy Spirit of the Bible, no matter what ‘you want to believe’, as the evidence proves.
It’s like their understanding is based on a carnal view of scripture with some mysticism thrown in.
Even Paul commended the Bereans for checking with scripture to make sure his teachings were correct. Jesus Himself referred to scripture for His teaching. Yet the Catholic Church says to check with them before scripture. Notice the switch there?
That truth should strike fear into the heart of every Catholic.
Wow! You couldn’t have done a better job of proving the statement of RnMomof7 in post 139!
So you don’t teach your children anything because it’s conditioning? I guess your kids are part of the problem then.
...the ordained ministers of the New Covenant are called apostles (cf. Eph. 4:11), presbyters (cf. Jas 5:14), bishops (cf. 1 Tm 3:1), and deacons (cf. 1 Tm 3:8ff), but never priests (Gk. hiereus). So how do Catholics demonstrate the existence of a ministerial priesthood distinct from the universal priesthood?
First of all, a careful reading of 1 Peter 2, verses 5 and 9 reveals a reference to Exodus 19:6: “. . . and you shall be to me a kingdom of priests and a holy nation.” This text from Exodus indicates a universal priesthood in the Old Testament. And yet, in Exodus 19:22, we read, “And also let the priests who come near to the Lord consecrate themselves . . . “ In other words, a universal priesthood in the Old Covenant did not exclude the possibility of a distinct ministerial priesthood as well. It would be natural then to expect the same in the New Covenant. And indeed, that is precisely what we discover.
So I Send You
We should not be surprised that the noun “priest” (Gk. hiereus) was not used as a title for New Covenant ministers: This same term was used by the more numerous Jewish and even pagan priests of the first century (cf. Lk 1:8-9, Acts 14:13). Using different titles for New Covenant priests would be one way of distinguishing them. However, the verb form of hiereus is used for New Testament ministers. It is found when Paul speaks specifically of his ministry as an apostle, referring to it as a “priestly service”: “. . . because of the grace given me by God to be a minister of Christ Jesus to the Gentiles in the priestly service (Gk. hierourgounta) of the gospel of God ” (Rom 15:15b-16a).
Here we see a central clue to the priestly nature of New Covenant ministers that becomes more and more telling as we traverse Scripture. New Covenant ministers reveal their essence as priests by their priestly functions. We do not find this priestly function ascribed to deacons, but we do in the cases of apostles, bishops, and “elders.” In this brief analysis, we will only consider apostles and “elders.”
....more here: http://www.catholic.com/magazine/articles/the-priesthood-is-both-ministerial-and-universal
Then you're at odds with those Catholics who claim that in heaven that there are only Catholics because in heaven everyone is going to be Catholic.
Then why the differences? Does the Holy Spirit change?
The Roman church condemns the Orthodox.
Pope Innocent III and Lateran Council IV (A.D. 1215) [considered infallible by some]
Therefore, if anyone says that it is not by the institution of Christ the lord himself (that is to say, by divine law) that blessed Peter should have perpetual successors in the primacy over the whole Church; or that the Roman Pontiff is not the successor of blessed Peter in this primacy: let him be anathema. Vatican 1, Ses. 4, Cp. 1
The COUNCIL OF CONSTANCE under Pope John XXIII condemned the proposition of Wycliff that It is not necessary for salvation to believe that the Roman church is supreme among the other churches. [inasmuch as it would deny the primacy of the supreme pontiff over the other individual churches.] Session 84 May 1415;
http://www.ewtn.com/library/COUNCILS/CONSTANC.HTM
St. Thomas Aquinas: It is also shown that to be subject to the Roman Pontiff is necessary for salvation. For Cyril says in his Thesaurus: Therefore, brethren, if we imitate Christ so as to hear his voice remaining in the Church of Peter and so as not be puffed up by the wind of pride, lest perhaps because of our quarrelling the wily serpent drive us from paradise as once he did Eve. And Maximus in the letter addressed to the Orientals [Greeks] says: The Church united and established upon the rock of Peters confession we call according to the decree of the Savior the universal Church, wherein we must remain for the salvation of our souls and wherein loyal to his faith and confession we must obey him. St. Thomas Aquinas, Against the Errors of the Greeks, Pt. 2, ch. 36
http://dhspriory.org/thomas/ContraErrGraecorum.htm#b38
St. Ambrose, "Expl. of Luke: "The Lord severed the Jewish people from His kingdom, and heretics and schismatics are also severed from the kingdom of God and from the Church. Our Lord makes it perfectly clear that every assembly of heretics and schismatics belongs not to God, but to the unclean spirit." St. Ambrose, "Expl. of Luke", ch.7, 91-95; PL 15; SS, vol. II, p. 85, (quoted in The Apostolic Digest, by Michael Malone, Book 4: "The Book of Christians", Chapter 2: "Those Who Reject Christ's Church are Anti-Christian").http://www.geocities.com/Athens/Troy/6480/catholics/apostolic4chp2.html
Pope Boniface VIII, Bull Unam sanctam (1302): "We are compelled in virtue of our faith to believe and maintain that there is only one holy Catholic Church, and that one is apostolic. This we firmly believe and profess without qualification. Outside this Church there is no salvation and no remission of sins, the Spouse in the Canticle proclaiming: 'One is my dove, my perfect one. One is she of her mother, the chosen of her that bore her' (Canticle of Canticles 6:8); which represents the one mystical body whose head is Christ, of Christ indeed, as God. And in this, 'one Lord, one faith, one baptism' (Ephesians 4:5). Certainly Noah had one ark at the time of the flood, prefiguring one Church which perfect to one cubit having one ruler and guide, namely Noah, outside of which we read all living things were destroyed We declare, say, define, and pronounce that it is absolutely necessary for the salvation of every human creature to be subject to the Roman Pontiff."
Pope Boniface VIII, Unam Sanctam (Promulgated November 18, 1302) "If, therefore, the Greeks or others say that they are not committed to Peter and to his successors, they necessarily say that they are not of the sheep of Christ, since the Lord says that there is only one fold and one shepherd (Jn.10:16). Whoever, therefore, resists this authority, resists the command of God Himself. " http://www.fordham.edu/halsall/source/b8-unam.html
Pope Eugene IV, Cantate Domino (1441): "The most Holy Roman Church firmly believes, professes and preaches that none of those existing outside the Catholic Church, not only pagans, but also Jews and heretics and schismatics, can have a share in life eternal; but that they will go into the "eternal fire which was prepared for the devil and his angels" (Matthew 25:41), unless before death they are joined with Her; and that so important is the unity of this ecclesiastical body that only those remaining within this unity can profit by the sacraments of the Church unto salvation, and they alone can receive an eternal recompense for their fasts, their almsgivings, their other works of Christian piety and the duties of a Christian soldier. No one, let his almsgiving be as great as it may, no one, even if he pour out his blood for the Name of Christ, can be saved, unless he remain within the bosom and the unity of the Catholic Church."
Pope Eugene IV and the Council of Florence: "The sacrosanct Roman Church...firmly believes, professes, and proclaims that..not only pagans, but also Jews and heretics and schismatics cannot become participants in eternal life but will depart `into everlasting fire...unless before the end of life the same have been added to the flock; and that..no one, whatever almsgiving he has practiced, even if he has shed blood for the name of Christ, can be saved, unless he has remained in the bosom and unity of the Catholic Church. Pope Eugene IV and the Council of Florence (Seventeenth Ecumenical Council), Cantate Domino, Bull promulgated on February 4, 1441 (Florentine style), [considered infallible by some]
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.