by Kolbitar » September 24th, 2006, 12:33 pm
::Kolbitar, for your point to be actually a point, you'd have to show that these laity have retained sins when they shouldn't have (appeal of which could easily be made to other Christians), how the "professed Christians" as you specifically termed it, who made up the clergy were ordained by the church to start with so that they were given those powers through Apostolic Succession, and if this is a power that can actually be abused, period. The Bible said God gave the power through the installaion of the Holy Spirit without qualification - if God made a mistake, you take it up with Him. I'm gonna let Him do whatever He wants.
Let me say, Wolf, I've never, anywhere, experienced, read or heard of such a position attributed to Protestants, nor would I have ever imagined it -- it seems like a stretch, and, given it's novelty, a huuuugely unlikely one.
Protestants, instead, see no necessity to go to another person in order to have their sins forgiven. They have what are called accountability groups, but that is merely helpful, not based off the idea that I must go through another person. Now, if any old professing Christian can forgive my sins, and any old professing Christian can retain my sins, then there's not really any point in granting such a power. Why? Becuase if person A can retain my sins, and he really doesn't like me so he decides to withhold my passport to Heaven by so doing, then what? Do I just go to another person? If so, then if someone who really should have their sins retained, because they're not really penetant, likewise goes on down the line till he finds his professing Christian buddy who lives in sin, gets drunk and watches porn habitually, then the "power" becomes a joke (is he really going to reatin them when they should be retained?). Priests, on the other hand, are trained, have rules to follow (which are necessary given this power, but not specifically found in the Bible), and are in a position which makes the experience holy, set apart, and an object of communal unity -- therefore to be taken seriosuly.
Ahh, I can't even really believe I'm arguing this... I don't say that out of frustration; I do say it with a chuckle of unbelief...
Jesse
The man who lives in contact with what he believes to be a living Church is a man always expecting to meet Plato and Shakespeare tomorrow at breakfast. He is always expecting to see some truth that he has never seen before. --Chesterton
Sober Inebriation:
http://soberinebriationblog.blogspot.com/