Easter Joy. You say “Enthusiastic you may be, yes, but in spite of what you, “Roman Catholic Women Priests” and who knows how many other sub- denominations we have running around after their Catholic baptisms pretending otherwise, Roman Catholics believe what the Church teaches. The mark of baptism may not be removed from you, but you are perfectly capable of removing yourself from the truth into which you were baptized”
I frankly object, when you have no idea who I am, to your association of me with such groups as “Roman Catholic Women Priests” and your reference to the possibility of me being a member of some sub denomination running about after my Catholic baptism etc, etc. There is not a single heretical bone in my body and I don’t need a patronising lecture from you about the possibility of removing oneself from the truth into which one is baptised.
You also say:
If you don’t think God is the one behind the sacraments and the authority of the Pope and all the rest, you may as well forget the Catholic Church. Without the Holy Spirit, with Jesus Christ as Her True Head, a heirarchical Church is a ludicrous invention. You’re in a ridiculous position from the word “go.”
Apart from the rather “ridiculous” spelling of the word “hierarchical”, I object to being told I’m in a ridiculous position because you apparently and erroneously assume I don’t think God is behind the sacraments etc. I am a Roman Catholic. Of course I believe God is behind the sacraments etc. I believe in baptism by a priest. I believe in confession to a priest. I do NOT believe in women priests. I believe in the papacy and I believe in the infallibility of the Pope when he speaks Ex Cathedra. I believe in the communion of Saints, the sacrifice of the Mass, transubstantiation, prayers for the souls in Purgatory, have a devotion to Our Lady and I am in no way a protestant as anyone who knows me will tell you. I merely make the point that confession to a priest is not the sole means of forgiveness of sin.
You also write “ ….who knows if you’re telling the truth, or whether you’re really sorry? God does…” That, my friend, is exactly my point. God does know and the priest does not or at least cannot be sure. You also write “the sacrament of Reconciliation is the ordinary means that God chose for the forgiveness of sins”. I agree with this too, but it’s not the only means.
I note you have carefully avoided the points I made. I asked, when answering a post about priests judging if we’re contrite or not, “Is this the same priest who is apparently deciding if we are really contrite in our confession? If so, what happens to our genuine confession to a paedophile pretending to act as a “pontifex” between God and man” Perhaps you could address that point, plus the other points I make when I ask about people going to confession, trotting out a few sins and then being absolved. I AM NOT KNOCKING CONFESSION! I BELIEVE IN IT!!!
Whilst talking about priests you state and I quote, “Through fidelity to his priestly office, however, he does have the power to forgive sins. This is a gift that does not come from his own personal holiness, but from the one perfect Priesthood of Jesus Christ, of which he is a minister”. Again, I agree entirely, but what happens when he is not faithful to his priestly office, how do we know if we’re forgiven then?
As far as the post from Bilop is concerned, you state “You always know someone has no argument when they trot out the sex scandals to smear priests”. Number one it is an immense and utterly untrue generalisation to say that anyone who talks about sex scandals in the church has NO ARGUMENT. That would mean that many members of our own Catholic Hierarchy, Cardinals and the Holy Father himself have no argument, because they have expressed deep concern and taken great steps to combat this (What planet are you on Bilop)
Number two, these scandals are a fact, however distasteful. I fully agree (and often argue this point against my Protestant colleagues) that there are probably TEN TIMES more teachers, doctors, carpenters, plumbers, policemen, construction workers who are guilty of these heinous acts, but we’re not counting on them to hear our confession, consider if we are contrite or not, absolve us, dispense advice and impose a suitable penance and it is sometimes years and years and years before these priests are discovered. I am NOT smearing priests, just stating a fact. I am well aware that 99.9999999% are innocent.
You also say – “Confession or the intent to confess is necessary for the forgiveness of mortal sins”. Again, I agree, we must confess our sins, but you go onto say “You may not like it, but Christ established the Church and made this particular rule” If by this you mean confession to a priest only as opposed to confession to Christ directly, then this is simply not correct. Yes Christ gave the Apostles and their descendents the power to forgive sins, no doubt about it. But He did not make any rule that people had to go to go only to priests. Even the priests I know agree with this. (If he did, please point the part in the Bible where he says this is the only way to be forgiven out to me) Where is it recorded that Christ ever told anyone that they could only go to a priest to confess. Just because he imbued the apostles with this power does not preclude a person from confessing to Christ, or He would have said so considering this crucial point and he simply did not say this!! He did not rely on man alone to dispense this heavenly power and in some cases it’s a good thing he didn’t.