X-Delivery-Notice:  SMTP MAIL FROM does not correspond to sender.
X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.3 PL11]
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.christia
Date:         Sun, 13 Sep 1992 14:55:25 EDT
From:         Tim King <timk@WORLD.STD.COM>
Subject:      Absolution, Tradition, and Christianity

Thoughout my previous posts, I've tried to keep in mind the practical
value of the discussions at hand.  Although I did not state it explicitly,
this viewpoint had a strong effect on the content of my questions and
objections.  Now, however, I would like to bring the discussion home to
where we live, as Catholics, Protestants, or whatever we may call
ourselves.

We are christians, plain and simple.  Catholic posts have substantially
confirmed that in God's eyes I, a Protestant, am by all probability indeed
saved.  I would like to reaffirm the acceptance I have for their salvation
as well.

In the thread on Absolution, we determined that God indeed accepts the
Protestant's sincere confession as well as the Catholic's.  Although the
Catholic has a need to confess to a duly ordained priest, I see no reason
to suspect that his confession is any less meaningful or sincere than that
of the Protestant, who desires to confess only to God and, possibly, a
brother or clergy of his choosing.

It has been stated that the Catholic priest can express to the sinner
God's forgiveness.  Likewise, the Protestant minister affirms to his
parishoner the incredible mercy God has bestowed on His people.  Some need
only to confess to God since they know that His kingdom is indeed within
their reach.

My point is that what confession means to the Catholic, repentance means
to the Protestant.  What the sacrement means to some, the councel of an
esteemed friend means to others.  There is no reason given why one way is
better than another, except that for the subject it is meaningful.

Now, the Catholic may say, "No!  The priest is authorized by God to
dispense the sacrement." But he is opposed by the Protestant who
emphatically believes that God, and only God, is He who forgives.  I
maintain that *both* are in the right.  For in the practical assessment of
these claims, both are forgiven in the same way.  We have established and
accepted the fact that the first believes the sacrement to be necessary;
so let him accept it.  We know that the second needs only to speak to God;
let him do so.  Even the Catholics on the list have not denied that God
accepts my sincere confession to God, and I would be lying if I said that
I never needed to be assured of God's mercy.

This is all quite reasonable since we also know that if the Catholic were
in a situation where he could not receive the sacrement, he can be assured
of his forgiveness because of his repentant heart.  Also, the Protestant
sometimes -- perhaps often -- needs to talk things through with a brother
or minister who will assure him that God is merciful. In both cases, the
feelings are the same.  The motives are the same. The actions are the
same.  God's forgiveness is the same.  God's mercy is unchanging and given
without cost, and we cannot dare deny it! (Rom 3:21-26)

The matter of tradition is not an easy one to deal with.  It is not only
present in the Catholic perspective, but is taught in most Protestant
denominations as well.  Sometimes it is under cover of accepted convention
or creed, but more often than not it is there.  It is readily seen in some
of the onslaughts that occur not only between the two but also between
denominations and too often within individual churches.

However, I would be the last to say that tradition is evil.  Far from it,
godly traditions can give us a means by which we can serve God.  For some,
they are the means by which righteousness is assured.  As fellow
christians, we should support each other in showing our dedication and
devotion to God. (Rom 14:1-13ff; 1 Cor 8:8-13; Gal 4:8-10; 1 Thess 5:14)

Traditions are sometimes started in order to counteract some heresy or
abberant teaching that has emerged at a particular point in time.
Sometimes traditions are started because they fit in with the accepted way
of doing things.  In either case, the tradition has cultural significance.
But eventually, as the tides of time beat against the changing sands of
culture, the tradition loses much of its original meaning.  Instead of a
point on which we can gather to serve God, it becomes a rallying point
around which we, in our individual groups, can identify ourselves against
others who we should be joining. (Eph 4:1-6; 2 Tim 2:22-26)

Therefore, a tradition that is not in disagreement with the christian
faith is good to those for whom it is meaningful.  And if one finds such a
tradition meaningful, he should involve himself in it.  Just because two
traditions, creeds, or conventions are in disagreement does not make one
or the other less meaningful or less christian.  This is true because we
are not saved by our traditions, including the sacrement of confession. We
are saved by the blood of Christ!  (Gal 6:11-15; 1 Pet 1:13-21)

-TimK
--
Tim King                  |  Some of us favor logic in making decisions.
24 Myrtle Street          |  Some, emotions.  I, personally, get very    |\
Dedham, MA 02026          |  emotional about faulty logic! :-)           | >
timk@world.std.com        |                                             <>
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU