Posted on 07/05/2002 10:14:23 AM PDT by Polycarp
The scenario:
You've decided to help out on a confirmation retreat at your parish.You're a small group leader with five candidates in your group. The youth are responding well until the time comes to go to confession. One of the girls in your group, Michelle, has an objection to going to confession.
Her Evangelical boyfriend has apparently convinced her she has no need of a priest to confess her sins. "Why can't I confess my sins directly to God?" Michelle protests.
Evidently, Michelle was waiting for this opportunity to make her stand, because she immediately reels off five Scripture passages that she had no doubt memorized for the occasion.
"Isaiah 43:25 says, 'I, even I, am he that blotteth out thy transgressions for mine own sake, and will not remember thy sins.' It's God who forgives sins," she confidently proclaims. You notice she is quoting from the King James Bible.
"Further, Hebrews 3:1 and 7:22-27 tell us Jesus is our one and only true High Priest and that there are not many priests, but one in the New Testament. The Bible makes it clear in 1 John 2:2 that Jesus 'is the propitiation for our sins,' and not some priest, 'and not for ours only, but also for the sins of the whole world'. And how can we Catholics claim priests act in the role of mediator in confession when 1 Timothy 2:5 tells us, 'For there is one God, and one mediator between God and men, the man Christ Jesus'?"
Your response:
You begin by complimenting Michelle on her knowledge of Scripture, and encourage the rest of your group to imitate her in the practice of memorizing Sacred Scripture. You thank her for both her honesty and for bringing up these objections to confession. In answering them, these objections can serve to deepen our understanding of the One, True Faith established by Jesus Christ.
Step One: After thanking Michelle once again for bringing up Isaiah 43:25, which teaches us that it is, in fact, God Who forgives our sins, you ask another member of the group, Mark, to read Leviticus 19:20-22:"If a man lies carnally with a woman . . . they shall not be put to death . . . but he shall bring a guilt offering for himself to the Lord, to the door of the tent of meeting, a ram for a guilt offering. And the priest shall make atonement for him . . . before the Lord for his sin which he has committed, and the sin which he has committed shall be forgiven him."
Remember, Isaiah 43:25 is an Old Testament passage. It declares that God forgives our sins. On that point all Christians agree. However, here in Leviticus, also in the Old Testament, the priest has been given the ministry of reconciliation. He mediates God's forgiveness to the sinner. Obviously, this does not take away from the fact that it is God Who does the forgiving. God is the efficient, or ultimate, cause of forgiveness. The priest is the instrumental cause
Michelle immediately objects. "But Jesus is our priest and mediator in the New Testament."
You respond, "We'll get to that in a minute, Michelle, but first I want to make sure everyone understands what we're saying." Now, in order to keep this from becoming a confrontation between yourself and Michelle, you turn to the rest of the group and say, "God indeed forgives us our sins, as Isaiah 43:25 teaches. However, that doesn't eliminate the possibility of using priests to mediate that forgiveness to the world as Leviticus 19:20-22 teaches. Right?"
You notice Michelle responds affirmatively with the others, so you quickly move ahead.
Step Two:
"Michelle brought up another excellent point we need to address. How can we Catholics have priests to forgive our sins, when Hebrews 3:1 says Jesus is the apostle and High Priest of our confession? And what about Hebrews 7:22-27?" At this point, you ask another member of your small group, Kendra, to read the text.
"This makes Jesus the surety of a better covenant. The former priests were many in number, because they were prevented by death from continuing in office; but he holds his priesthood permanently, because he continues for ever . . . For it was fitting that we should have such a high priest, holy, blameless, unstained, separated from sinners, exalted above the heavens. He has no need, like those high priests, to offer sacrifices daily, first for his own sins and then for those of the people; he did this once for all when he offered up himself."
At this point, you see all five of your group members absorbed in thought. Jennifer suddenly pipes up and says, "How do we answer that one? It seems that Jesus is our only priest."
To answer, you call on Andrea to read 1 Peter 2:5, 9.
"And like living stones be yourselves built into a spiritual house, to be a holy priesthood, to offer spiritual sacrifices acceptable to God through Jesus Christ . . . But you are a chosen race, a royal priesthood, a holy nation, God's own people . . ."
If Jesus is the one and only priest in the New Testament in the strict sense that Protestants believe, then we have a contradiction in Sacred Scripture, because 1 Peter teaches that all believers are members of a holy priesthood. The key to clearing up this difficulty is in understanding the nature of the Body of Christ. Believers do not take away from Christ's unique Priesthood, rather, as members of His Body, we establish His Priesthood on earth. We are His hands and feet.Michelle jumps in, "That doesn't say there's any special priesthood we have to go to in order to have our mortal sins forgiven. That text says we're all priests.
"We'll get to that," you assure her, "but we are making progress. A moment ago we couldn't see how anyone could be a priest in the New Testament other than Christ, and now we see how all believers are priests.
"Before we move on to demonstrate a special priesthood, can we all see how Christ being the true High Priest does not eliminate the possibility of there being many priests? We are priests as believers inasmuch as we participate in the one priesthood of Christ, as members of His Body."At this point you clear up the difficulty of 1 Timothy 2:5: "For there is one God, and there is one mediator between God and men, the man Christ Jesus." Yes, Jesus is the one mediator between God and men. However, Christians are also called to be mediators in Him. When we intercede for one another or share the gospel with someone, we act as mediators of God's love and grace in the one true Mediator, Christ Jesus (cf. 1 Tim. 2:1-7, 4:16, Rom. 10:9-14).
Now what about 1 John 2:2? "He is the expiation [propitiation] for our sins, and not for ours only but also for the sins of the whole world." How can we demonstrate from Scripture the existence of a priesthood with the power to forgive sins, within the universal priesthood of all believers?
Step Three:
Now show the context of 1 Peter 2:5, 9. When St. Peter teaches us about the universal priesthood of all believers, he refers to Exodus 19:6 where God speaks of ancient Israel as "a kingdom of priests and a holy nation," a reference to the universal priesthood in the Old Testament "church." But this did not preclude the existence of the Aaronic and Levitical priesthoods within that universal priesthood (cf. Ex. 28 and Num. 3:1-12).
In an analogous way, we have a universal "royal priesthood" in the New Testament, but we also have an ordained clergy who have priestly authority given to them by Christ to carry out His ministry of reconciliation (cf. 2 Cor. 5:17-21, John 20:21-23, James 5:16). Michelle once again protests. "But you still haven't answered the Scripture I quoted earlier. 1 John 2:2 says Jesus is the propitiation for our sins, not a priest. And in Mark 2:5-10, Jesus forgives the sins of a paralytic. When the scribes object to that and call it blasphemy, Jesus says: ' "But that you may know that the Son of Man has authority to forgive sins on earth," he said to the paralytic, "I say to you, rise, pick up your mat, and go home."' Scripture is clear. Jesus is the One we go to for forgiveness. Where does the Bible say there's a priesthood with the authority to forgive sins
Step Four:
Now ask Mark to read John 20:21-23 to the group: "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.' "
"What does this text say to you?" you ask. Andrea speaks up: "I think it says Jesus gave His authority to forgive sins to His disciples, which we read about in Mark 2." The rest of the group agrees, except for Michelle, who had been listening attentively, but is now studying the text intensely.
You point out the setting: Jesus has risen from the dead and is about to ascend to the Father. In verse 21, Jesus says, "Peace be with you. As the Father has sent me, even so I send you." What did the Father send Jesus to do? He came to be the one true mediator between God and men: proclaiming the gospel (cf. Luke 4:16-21), reigning supreme as King of kings and Lord of lords (cf. Rev. 19:16), and especially, redeeming the world through the forgiveness of sins (cf. 1 Peter 2:21-25, Mark 2:5-10). So this is what Christ is sending the apostles to do in His name: To proclaim the gospel with His authority (cf. Matt. 18:15-17), to govern the Church in His stead (cf. Luke 22:29-30), and to sanctify the Church through the sacraments, especially the Eucharist (cf. John 6:54, 1 Cor. 11:24-29) and confession.
Christ, the High Priest of the New Covenant, ordained the apostles to continue His priestly mission. In John 20:22-23, Jesus then emphasizes this essential part of the priestly ministry of the apostles: forgiving men's sins in the name of Christ. "If you forgive the sins of any, they are forgiven; if you retain the sins of any, they are retained." This is confession. The only way the apostles can either forgive or retain sins is by first hearing those sins confessed, and then making a judgement as to whether or not the penitent should be absolved.
"You mean it's up to the priest to decide whether or not I'm going to be forgiven?" Michelle queries indignantly.
"Yes, Michelle. That's what the Bible teaches here in John 20.
"Let's say a woman confesses adultery," you continue. "When the priest asks her if she's sorry for her sin and resolved to turn away from it, she says she's not. The priest would then be bound to 'retain' her sins. One has to be truly sorry for his or her sins in order to be forgiven." "What if she lies to the priest and says she's sorry when she's not, and then the priest absolves her?" Jennifer asks. "Will she be forgiven?" "No," you respond. "The sacrament does not take effect unless the penitent is truly sorry for his or her sins. In fact, lying in confession is another serious sin, called the sin of sacrilege.
Step Five:
You notice Michelle is much less defensive when she asks her next question. "Do we see any examples of the apostles or church elders actually forgiving sins?"
You have Andrea read 2 Corinthians 2:10: "Any one whom you forgive, I also forgive. What I have forgiven, if I have forgiven anything, has been for your sake in the presence of Christ."
Actually, a better translation of the phrase "in the presence of Christ" is "in the person of Christ." The Greek word in the passage is prosopon. The Latin word persona comes from this word. The Greek prefix pro translates to Latin as per. The Greek sopon becomes sona in Latin. Interestingly, the King James Bible renders the better translation of "person."
You read James 5:14-16 aloud: "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. The prayer of a righteous man has great power in its effects."
You point out Scripture teaches us we must go to the "elders," not just anyone, to receive this "anointing" and the forgiveness of our sins.Michelle objects. "In verse 16 it says to confess our sins to one another and pray for one another. James is just encouraging us to confess our sins to a close friend so we can help one another to overcome our faults."
You respond, "We have to examine the context of Scripture in order to understand it properly. There are two reasons we know St. James is not saying we should confess our sins to just anyone. First, he's just told us to go to the elder, or priest, in verse 14. Then, verse 16 begins with the word "therefore." That word is a conjunction that connects verse 16 back to verses 14 and 15. It's the elder to whom St. James is telling us to confess our sins.
Step Six:
At this point, there's a break and you decide to take Michelle outside for a little one on one. You ask her, "Well, what do you think?"She replies thoughtfully, "I have to admit, John 20:21-23 and all the rest of the verses you pointed out make it awfully clear. But it's so hard to confess your sins to a man."
"Yep, I agree," you say. "But I guarantee you, you will walk out of that confessional feeling like you're walking on air. And remember, when the priest says, 'I absolve you of your sins in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Spirit,' there are two people speaking at the same time: the priest, and Jesus Himself, Who loves you more than words could ever say."
After the break, it's time for confession. You're watching for Michelle. As soon as she comes out of the confessional, she looks right at you with a bright, beaming smile. As she approaches, you tease, "Was I right?"
The smile never leaves her face as she slaps you a high five and walks toward the chapel to pray.
Reprinted with permission from Envoy Magazine, www.envoymagazine.com
Are you suggesting that of Becky?
Mac and Becky post substance..
I will say to you there are some posters that spam a thread to death with gobble goop that NO one will read..
I guess it beats have to consider what you believe
BigMack
Mark 9:42 "But whoever causes one of these little ones who believe in Me to stumble, it would be better for him if a millstone were hung around his neck, and he were thrown into the sea."
Well, I hope Michelle's boyfriend can straighten her out when she gets home.
Can you explain why IF they understood the words of Christ as you imply they did not teach it as doctrine in the doctrinal letters (as they did the Lords supper and the preaching of the word?
Act 3:19 Repent ye therefore, and be converted, that your sins may be blotted out, when the times of refreshing shall come from the presence of the Lord;
Act 3:20 And he shall send Jesus Christ, which before was preached unto you:
This is what Peter taught
God only can forgive sins, and Christ being God, has the power to do also but he never gave any such power to his apostles; nor did they ever assume any such power nor did they pretend to exercise it. This is to be understood in a ministerial way.
By preaching the full and free remission of sins, through the blood of Christ to those that repent of their sins, and believe in Christ and then teaching that all people that repent and believe have all their sins are forgiven for Christ's sake are in in agreement with Christ's own words, in his declaration and commission to his disciples; see Mr 16:16.
He says that whose soever sins ye retain, they are retained: that is the gospel of Jsus Christ. Those that refuse to repent and believe would be declaired lost by the apostles because they are unbelievers, and impenitent sinners; who dying without repentance towards God, and faith in the Lord Jesus Christ, will be damned, and are damned.
I await one incident in the NT where the belief you hold was demonstrated ot taught.
What kind of inane statement is this?
Yes I did read the whole article. I did not know that we were required to give a point by point refutation. I have a feeling that even if I had it would not have been received any different then the point I did refute.
I understand the doctrine of the trinity. My inane statement goes to the fact that God set up the rules (so to speak) that Christians have to follow. And God does not lie, (Heb. 6:18). God tells us, Jesus tells us, and the apostles taught us, that sins are forgiven by believeing and trusting in the sacrafice that Jesus made on the cross. Since God does not lie, and this is the way he set up his kingdom, my statement that God cannot arbitrarly forgive sins is really not inane.
Becky
Another fact:
All of you, please stop and talk to your priest and ask him to say the words of absolution slowly for you.
The power invoked in the absolution and forgiveness of sins is not a human power (priestly power), but rather the power of God/Jesus Christ.
I cannot remember the exact words, but maybe someone could post them.
You sound like an LDS when you phrase it such that there is a dichotomy between the power of God to forgive sins and the power of Jesus to forgive sins.
There is only ONE God.
I forgot that two people use that one screen name.
So here is a clarification...
Becky, my apologies, I confused you with Big Mack.
Big Mack,
No apologies, as usual your posts are BS
Becky
I know that God and Jesus and the HG are one and the same. Nevertheless, God sent Jesus to earth to die so that man's sins could be atoned for. If you have a problem with that talk to God.
Also there is no where in the Gospels or Acts where the apostles forgave sin. They preached forgiveness of sin by trusting in the sacrafice that Jesus made.
Becky
The bottom line is they did not have the same meaning to it than you and the church does. "Show me the beef" allend :>)...where did they EVER assume that authority or teach it?
Polycarp, every time the truth is given to you you scream BS, you can't handle the TRUTH!
BigMack
In an analogous way, we have a universal "royal priesthood" in the New Testament, but we also have an ordained clergy who have priestly authority given to them by Christ to carry out His ministry of reconciliation (cf. 2 Cor. 5:17-21, John 20:21-23, James 5:16).
This is an analogy that you cannot draw. First of all, look at the context of Exodus 19:6
Exodus 19 3And Moses went up to God, and the LORD called to him from the mountain, saying, "Thus you shall say to the house of Jacob, and tell the children of Israel: 4"You have seen what I did to the Egyptians, and how I bore you on eagles' wings and brought you to Myself. 5Now therefore, if you will indeed obey My voice and keep My covenant, then you shall be a special treasure to Me above all people; for all the earth is Mine. 6And you shall be to Me a kingdom of priests and a holy nation.' These are the words which you shall speak to the children of Israel."
Verse 6 is future tense and is a condition of the covenant. Was it ever realized in Old Testament Israel? We learn later on that Isreal doesn't keep the covenant.
Jeremiah 11 9And the LORD said to me, "A conspiracy has been found among the men of Judah and among the inhabitants of Jerusalem. 10They have turned back to the iniquities of their forefathers who refused to hear My words, and they have gone after other gods to serve them; the house of Israel and the house of Judah have broken My covenant which I made with their fathers."
Jeremiah 31:31 "Behold, the days are coming, says the LORD, when I will make a new covenant with the house of Israel and with the house of Judah-- 32not according to the covenant that I made with their fathers in the day that I took them by the hand to lead them out of the land of Egypt, My covenant which they broke, though I was a husband to them,[1] says the LORD. 33But this is the covenant that I will make with the house of Israel after those days, says the LORD: I will put My law in their minds, and write it on their hearts; and I will be their God, and they shall be My people.
Jeremiah 31 shows how the covenant with Israel is broken and that God will make a new covenant. What is this new covenant? Hebrews 8 tells us:
7 For if that first covenant had been faultless, then no place would have been sought for a second. 8Because finding fault with them, He says: "Behold, the days are coming, says the LORD, when I will make a new covenant with the house of Israel and with the house of Judah-- 9not according to the covenant that I made with their fathers in the day when I took them by the hand to lead them out of the land of Egypt; because they did not continue in My covenant, and I disregarded them, says the LORD. 10For this is the covenant that I will make with the house of Israel after those days, says the LORD: I will put My laws in their mind and write them on their hearts; and I will be their God, and they shall be My people. 11None of them shall teach his neighbor, and none his brother, saying, "Know the LORD,' for all shall know Me, from the least of them to the greatest of them. 12For I will be merciful to their unrighteousness, and their sins and their lawless deeds I will remember no more."[Jer. 31:31-34]
13In that He says, "A new covenant," He has made the first obsolete. Now what is becoming obsolete and growing old is ready to vanish away.
This analogy is being drawn off of a faulty, obsolete covenant that has vanished away. Israel never realized the promise of being a nation of priests because they could not keep the covenant. But God is merciful, and he sent someone who could perfectly keep the covenant, His Son, Jesus. Now, all who are in Christ have His righteousness and are priests in Him.
Romans 3
21 But now the righteousness of God apart from the law is revealed, being witnessed by the Law and the Prophets, 22even the righteousness of God, through faith in Jesus Christ, to all and on all who believe. For there is no difference; 23for all have sinned and fall short of the glory of God,
Romans 5:17 For if by the one man's offense death reigned through the one, much more those who receive abundance of grace and of the gift of righteousness will reign in life through the One, Jesus Christ.
Oh. I didn't realize his post was simply agreeing with you:
" I read the article, its a fluff piece, there's nothing to refute, the catholic priest doctrine is made up by men, it ain't in God's Word, you guys really should stop adding to Gods Word."
Of course, this is what I was calling pure BS.
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.