Posted on 11/21/2016 8:37:06 AM PST by 2ndDivisionVet
VATICAN CITY, Nov 21 (Reuters) - Pope Francis on Monday extended indefinitely to all Roman Catholic priests the power to forgive abortion, a right previously reserved for bishops or special confessors.
Francis, who has made a more inclusive and forgiving Roman Catholic Church a characteristic of his papacy, made the announcement in a document known as an "apostolic letter" after Sunday's close of the Church's "Holy Year of Mercy".
He said he wanted to "restate as firmly as I can that abortion is a grave sin, since it puts an end to an innocent life" but "there is no sin that God's mercy cannot reach and wipe away when it finds a repentant heart seeking to be reconciled with (God)"....
(Excerpt) Read more at aol.com ...
I love your description of your hungry horde!
May you all have abundant blessings from Our Lord, and discover more of them every day!
And in every member of your inlaws and outlaws, friends and family. Yahoo!
Is it s hard to understand when a person is asking a question or seeking further clarification? Aren't there clues in the word order and the question mark?
He said it to Peter. The End.
I don’t think you’ve been paying attention.
I don't understand unreasonable.
I don't understand this remark.
SURELY you believe the words of Early Church Fathers...
Don't you?
As regards the oft-quoted Mt. 16:18, note the following bishops promise in the profession of faith of Vatican 1:
• Basil of Seleucia, Oratio 25:
'You are Christ, Son of the living God.'...Now Christ called this confession a rock, and he named the one who confessed it 'Peter,' perceiving the appellation which was suitable to the author of this confession. For this is the solemn rock of religion, this the basis of salvation, this the wall of faith and the foundation of truth: 'For no other foundation can anyone lay than that which is laid, which is Christ Jesus.' To whom be glory and power forever. — Oratio XXV.4, M.P.G., Vol. 85, Col. 296-297.
• Bede, Matthaei Evangelium Expositio, 3:
You are Peter and on this rock from which you have taken your name, that is, on myself, I will build my Church, upon that perfection of faith which you confessed I will build my Church by whose society of confession should anyone deviate although in himself he seems to do great things he does not belong to the building of my Church...Metaphorically it is said to him on this rock, that is, the Saviour which you confessed, the Church is to be built, who granted participation to the faithful confessor of his name. — 80Homily 23, M.P.L., Vol. 94, Col. 260. Cited by Karlfried Froehlich, Formen, Footnote #204, p. 156 [unable to verify by me].
• Cassiodorus, Psalm 45.5:
'It will not be moved' is said about the Church to which alone that promise has been given: 'You are Peter and upon this rock I shall build my Church and the gates of Hell shall not prevail against it.' For the Church cannot be moved because it is known to have been founded on that most solid rock, namely, Christ the Lord. — Expositions in the Psalms, Volume 1; Volume 51, Psalm 45.5, p. 455
• Chrysostom (John) [who affirmed Peter was a rock, but here not the rock in Mt. 16:18]:
Therefore He added this, 'And I say unto thee, Thou art Peter, and upon this rock I will build my Church; that is, on the faith of his confession. — Chrysostom, Homilies on the Gospel of Saint Matthew, Homily LIIl; Philip Schaff, Nicene and Post-Nicene Fathers (http://www.ccel.org/ccel/schaff/npnf110.iii.LII.html)
• Cyril of Alexandria:
When [Peter] wisely and blamelessly confessed his faith to Jesus saying, 'You are Christ, Son of the living God,' Jesus said to divine Peter: 'You are Peter and upon this rock I will build my Church.' Now by the word 'rock', Jesus indicated, I think, the immoveable faith of the disciple.”. — Cyril Commentary on Isaiah 4.2.
• Origen, Commentary on the Gospel of Matthew (Book XII):
“For a rock is every disciple of Christ of whom those drank who drank of the spiritual rock which followed them, 1 Corinthians 10:4 and upon every such rock is built every word of the church, and the polity in accordance with it; for in each of the perfect, who have the combination of words and deeds and thoughts which fill up the blessedness, is the church built by God.'
“For all bear the surname ‘rock’ who are the imitators of Christ, that is, of the spiritual rock which followed those who are being saved, that they may drink from it the spiritual draught. But these bear the surname of rock just as Christ does. But also as members of Christ deriving their surname from Him they are called Christians, and from the rock, Peters.” — Commentary on the Gospel of Matthew (Book XII), sect. 10,11 ( http://www.newadvent.org/fathers/101612.htm)
• Hilary of Potier, On the Trinity (Book II): Thus our one immovable foundation, our one blissful rock of faith, is the confession from Peter's mouth, Thou art the Son of the living God. On it we can base an answer to every objection with which perverted ingenuity or embittered treachery may assail the truth."-- (Hilary of Potier, On the Trinity (Book II), para 23; Philip Schaff, editor, The Nicene & Post Nicene Fathers Series 2, Vol 9.
It means as a separate class from the only priesthood (hieráteuma) in the NT church, that of all believers, (1Pt. 2:5,9; Re 1:6; 5:10; 20:6)
I don't know what you mean by "distinctively titled". Priests in the NT are called presbyteroi. Priests in the Greek church today are called presbyteroi. Is that straightforward enough for you?
Irrelevant. In the NT church presbyteroi are NEVER would called priests. For the word which the Holy Spirit distinctively uses for priests *, is “hiereus” or “archiereus (over 280 times total, mainly as the latter)” (Heb. 4:15; 10:11) and is never used for NT pastors. Nor do the words presbuteros (senior/elder) or episkopos (superintendent/overseer) - which He does use for NT pastors (over 60 times) - mean "priest."
The Catholic use of "priest" for what Scripture calls presbyteros/elder is defended by the use of an etymological fallacy since "priest" evolved from "presbyteros, if with uncertainty," with presbyteros being considered and called priests early on, based on Latin biblical and ecclesiastical language, and who were later referred to in old English (around 700 to 1000 AD) as "preostas" or "preost," and evidently finally resulting in the modern English "priest," thereby losing the distinction the Holy Spirit provided by never using the distinctive term of hiereus for NT presbuteros, or describing as them as a distinctive sacerdotal class of believers.
Etymologies are not definitions (examples: "cute" used to mean bow-legged; "bully" originally meant darling or sweetheart; "Nice" originally meant stupid or foolish; "counterfeit" used to mean a legitimate copy..
Catholic writer Greg Dues in "Catholic Customs & Traditions, a popular guide," states, "Priesthood as we know it in the Catholic church was unheard of during the first generation of Christianity, because at that time priesthood was still associated with animal sacrifices in both the Jewish and pagan religions." "When the Eucharist came to be regarded as a sacrifice [after Rome's theology], the role of the bishop took on a priestly dimension. By the third century bishops were considered priests. Presbyters or elders sometimes substituted for the bishop at the Eucharist. By the end of the third century people all over were using the title 'priest' (hierus in Greek and sacerdos in Latin) for whoever presided at the Eucharist." (http://books.google.com/books?id=ajZ_aR-VXn8C&source=gbs_navlinks_s) And R. J. Grigaitis (O.F.S.) (while yet trying to defend the use of priest), reveals, "The Greek word for this office is ‘?e?e?? (hiereus), which can be literally translated into Latin as sacerdos. First century Christians [such as the inspired writers] felt that their special type of hiereus (sacerdos) was so removed from the original that they gave it a new name, presbuteros (presbyter). Unfortunately, sacerdos didn't evolve into an English word, but the word priest [from old English "preost"] took on its definition." (http://grigaitis.net/weekly/2007/2007-04-27.html) "Uniquely sacerdotal"? What does that mean? It means they are distinctively called priests mainly due to the idea that only they can offer the Lord's supper as a sacrifice, which is also something NT pastors are never shown engaging in the life of the NT church, or being manifestly charged with doing. See Ignatius of Antioch if you think ancient Christians didn't view presbyteroi as those who offered the Eucharistic sacrifice on behalf of the assembly. What Ignatius said or is said to have said is not determinitive of Truth, but what Scripture says and teaches. And instead of showing the pastors officiating or ministering the Lord's supper as would be the case if the Holy Spirit was describing the Catholic church, He only manifestly describes the Lord's supper in one epistle (besides Jude 1:12, "feast of charity"), and in which not recognizing the church as the body of Christ is the issue. And nothing is said of a pastor/priest and his incantations. And instead of charging them with such, the primary work of NT pastors is that of prayer and preaching. (Act 6:3,4) "Preach the word; be instant in season, out of season; reprove, rebuke, exhort with all longsuffering and doctrine." (2 Timothy 4:2) And which is what is said to "nourish" the souls of believers, and believing it is how the lost obtain life in themselves. (1 Timothy 4:6; Psalms 19:7;Acts 15:7-9) Meanwhile a all believers are called to sacrifice (Rm. 12:1; 15:16; Phil. 2:17; 4:18; Heb. 13:15,16; cf. 9:9) and all constitute the only priesthood (hieráteuma) in the NT church Clerics in the early church were not "normatively celibate" because they were obviously all adult converts. That excuse fails because there were young converts as Timothy among whom there could easily be single men, and Paul would have surely mentioned that class in 1Tim. 3:1-7 and Titus 1, and taught that this was preferable for such pastors. Yet the only place celibacy is advocated is in 1Co. 7, and which applies to all in general, such as have that gift, and to presume that basically all pastors have that gift is presumptuous and dangerous. Moreover, fatherhood is invoked as test for pastoring. For if a man know not how to rule his own house, how shall he take care of the church of God? (1 Timothy 3:5) In addition, rather than being under vows, Paul and Barnabas, as the only two apostles who were single, had the option to take a wife. Have we not power to lead about a sister, a wife, as well as other apostles, and as the brethren of the Lord, and Cephas? (1 Corinthians 9:5) However, since you seem to think you know all about Catholicism and are qualified to lecture the rest of us on its alleged "errors," you obviously must know that celibacy is not an intrinsic requirement for the reception of Holy Orders, but only a disciplinary one, Sure i know this apologetic. It is church law and thus could be changed, but regardless, it is law. And sure, while not being an " intrinsic" requirement, the reality is that apart from certain clerical converts (who must never marry but become celibate if their wife dies) then RC priests must be celibate. so that the absence of celibacy as a requirement for the presbytery in the NT merely proves that that discipline hadn't been established yet. What kind of argument is that? The absence of something in the NT church hardly "proves" that it later should be. Mormons could argue like as you for their magic underwear. You cannot read later additions back into the church.
And where do you get this?
Wherefore I say unto you, All manner of sin and blasphemy shall be forgiven unto men: but the blasphemy against the Holy Ghost shall not be forgiven unto men. (Matthew 12:31)
See 36 . Show us (Acts onward) one instance of believers regularly coming to Catholic "priests" to confess their sins.
Show me an instance (Acts onward) of believers moving their bowels.
Can’t?
That must mean it never happened.
Ah, so the catholic apologists sinks to the level accustomed to it.
Well and truly stated!
The Church of Rome has recorded; in ACTS; just what is required of Gentile believers.
Do you accept what is written there??
Acts 15
The Council at Jerusalem
1 Certain people came down from Judea to Antioch and were teaching the believers: "Unless you are circumcised, according to the custom taught by Moses, you cannot be saved." 2 This brought Paul and Barnabas into sharp dispute and debate with them. So Paul and Barnabas were appointed, along with some other believers, to go up to Jerusalem to see the apostles and elders about this question. 3 The church sent them on their way, and as they traveled through Phoenicia and Samaria, they told how the Gentiles had been converted. This news made all the believers very glad. 4 When they came to Jerusalem, they were welcomed by the church and the apostles and elders, to whom they reported everything God had done through them.5 Then some of the believers who belonged to the party of the Pharisees stood up and said, "The Gentiles must be circumcised and required to keep the law of Moses."
6 The apostles and elders met to consider this question. 7 After much discussion, Peter got up and addressed them: "Brothers, you know that some time ago God made a choice among you that the Gentiles might hear from my lips the message of the gospel and believe. 8 God, who knows the heart, showed that he accepted them by giving the Holy Spirit to them, just as he did to us. 9 He did not discriminate between us and them, for he purified their hearts by faith. 10 Now then, why do you try to test God by putting on the necks of Gentiles a yoke that neither we nor our ancestors have been able to bear? 11 No! We believe it is through the grace of our Lord Jesus that we are saved, just as they are."
12 The whole assembly became silent as they listened to Barnabas and Paul telling about the signs and wonders God had done among the Gentiles through them. 13 When they finished, James spoke up. "Brothers," he said, "listen to me. 14 Simon has described to us how God first intervened to choose a people for his name from the Gentiles. 15 The words of the prophets are in agreement with this, as it is written:
16 "'After this I will return
and rebuild David's fallen tent.
Its ruins I will rebuild,
and I will restore it,
17 that the rest of mankind may seek the Lord,
even all the Gentiles who bear my name,
says the Lord, who does these things'
18 things known from long ago.19 "It is my judgment, therefore, that we should not make it difficult for the Gentiles who are turning to God. 20 Instead we should write to them, telling them to abstain from food polluted by idols, from sexual immorality, from the meat of strangled animals and from blood. 21 For the law of Moses has been preached in every city from the earliest times and is read in the synagogues on every Sabbath."
The Council's Letter to Gentile Believers
22 Then the apostles and elders, with the whole church, decided to choose some of their own men and send them to Antioch with Paul and Barnabas. They chose Judas (called Barsabbas) and Silas, men who were leaders among the believers. 23 With them they sent the following letter:The apostles and elders, your brothers,
To the Gentile believers in Antioch, Syria and Cilicia:
Greetings.
24 We have heard that some went out from us without our authorization and disturbed you, troubling your minds by what they said. 25 So we all agreed to choose some men and send them to you with our dear friends Barnabas and Paul— 26 men who have risked their lives for the name of our Lord Jesus Christ. 27 Therefore we are sending Judas and Silas to confirm by word of mouth what we are writing. 28 It seemed good to the Holy Spirit and to us not to burden you with anything beyond the following requirements: 29 You are to abstain from food sacrificed to idols, from blood, from the meat of strangled animals and from sexual immorality. You will do well to avoid these things.
Farewell.
30 So the men were sent off and went down to Antioch, where they gathered the church together and delivered the letter. 31 The people read it and were glad for its encouraging message. 32 Judas and Silas, who themselves were prophets, said much to encourage and strengthen the believers. 33 After spending some time there, they were sent off by the believers with the blessing of peace to return to those who had sent them. [34] 35 But Paul and Barnabas remained in Antioch, where they and many others taught and preached the word of the Lord.
Disagreement Between Paul and Barnabas
36 Some time later Paul said to Barnabas, "Let us go back and visit the believers in all the towns where we preached the word of the Lord and see how they are doing." 37 Barnabas wanted to take John, also called Mark, with them, 38 but Paul did not think it wise to take him, because he had deserted them in Pamphylia and had not continued with them in the work. 39 They had such a sharp disagreement that they parted company. Barnabas took Mark and sailed for Cyprus, 40 but Paul chose Silas and left, commended by the believers to the grace of the Lord. 41 He went through Syria and Cilicia, strengthening the churches.
False analogy, for this is not a theological doctrine but it is a abundantly manifest non-spiritual practice necessary for all human function that needs no mention in the NT (and human nature has not changed from the OT: Dt. 23:13 ), while what we are looking for is evidence for the doctrine that believers must normally engage in confessing sins to Catholic priests to be forgiven.
As with other primary functions of pastors, this is one that the Holy Spirit would surely show if He was describing Catholicism, but does not, and instead He shows what binding and loosing refers to, both in disputations and spiritual discipline and in deliverance. (Matthew 18:15-20) And in special cases of intercession, likely for confessed sins of ignorance, (James 5:15) as briefly explained (and here ) by the grace of God.
And with the only exhortation to confess sins is given in the general sense as to each other, to whom the spiritual power of binding and loosing can be realized, (James 5:16-20) while where forgiveness is normally promised it is simply said to be by confessing sins. (1Jn. 1:7-10)
Is there any post-Acts evidence of people “Taking this, and eating it, in remembrance of me...” or praying “Our Father, who art in Heaven...”?
Until you comprehend that TRUTH, you will continue in the religion of ca5tholiciism to 'strive for salvation' and fail. Striving means trying to earn. YOU CANNOT EARN GOD's Grace!
ONLY GOD can forgive sin and there is no priest on this earth equal to the Great High Priest in Heaven, so there is no earthly priest who has the authority on earth to forgive sin or to tell GOD what sin HE must forgive.
So you’re disputing the black-and-white text of John 20:23?
“Whose soever sins ye remit, they are remitted unto them; and whose soever sins ye retain, they are retained.”
The pope has authority to grant power to priests? Priests have power to forgive sins?
If true, I guess we could save a ton of money if we just stopped printing the Bible. Aesop’s Fables is pretty good; just use that.
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.