Testimony of Priest on Confession.

We hope you enjoy your visit.

You're currently viewing our forum as a guest. This means you are limited to certain areas of the board and there are some features you can't use. If you join our community, you'll be able to access member-only sections, and use many member-only features such as customizing your profile, sending personal messages, and voting in polls. Registration is simple, fast, and completely free.

Join our community!

If you're already a member please log in to your account to access all of our features:

Pages:
1
2
3

Testimony of Priest on Confession.
Topic Started: Dec 13 2008, 10:41 PM (1,224 Views)
geomizzi	Dec 13 2008, 10:41 PM Post #1
Advanced Member Posts: 115 Group: Members Member #1,620 Joined: August 10, 2007	Converted Priest- William Hogan-was a priest in 1854. Gives a very sober account of nuns in convents and confession. http://www.jesus-is-lord.com/hogan.htm Edited by geomizzi, Dec 14 2008, 09:30 PM.



domino	Dec 14 2008, 03:38 PM Post #2
Advanced Member Posts: 390 Group: Members Member #2,560 Joined: January 8, 2008	Here is a testimony of an ex-nun, along these same lines. I understand shortly after her testimony she disappeared. http://www.insightsofgod.com/downloads/Sister_Charlotte_-_A_Nun_s_testimony.pdf
	"For now we see through a glass, darkly; but then face to face: now I know in part; but then shall I know even as also I am known."


geomizzi	Dec 14 2008, 09:41 PM Post #3
Advanced Member Posts: 115 Group: Members Member #1,620 Joined: August 10, 2007	I know about the testimony of Charlotte-I have it in a book form. It is a mighty testimony- and I thank God for testimony's like these; for it is the only way we will ever know what life is like in a convent.



geomizzi	Dec 14 2008, 09:46 PM Post #4
Advanced Member Posts: 115 Group: Members Member #1,620 Joined: August 10, 2007	by Tracy at www.Jesus-is-Lord.com The following is excerpted from an article by David Cloud entitled, "The KJV and the Latin Vulgate". I know middle-aged former Catholics who can remember in the 60s when they were never encouraged to read the word. Many Catholics today still don't know much about the word, but the popish are attempting to incorrectly use a few passages to support their house of toothpicks called Romanism. The Council of Trent (1545-1564) placed the Bible on its list of prohibited books, and forbade any person to read the Bible without a license from a Roman Catholic bishop or inquisitor. The Council added these words: "That if any one shall dare to read or keep in his possession that book, without such a license, he shall not receive absolution till he has given it up to his ordinary." Rome's attempt to keep the Bible from men has continued to recent times. Pope Pius VII (1800-1823) denounced the Bible Society and expressed shock at the circulation of the Scriptures. Pius VII said, "It is evidence from experience, that the holy Scriptures, when circulated in the vulgar tongue, have, through the temerity of men, produced more harm than benefit." Pope Leo XII called the Protestant Bible the "Gospel of the Devil" in an encyclical letter of 1824. Pope Gregory XVI (1831-1846) railed "against the publication, distribution, reading, and possession of books of the holy Scriptures translated into the vulgar tongue." Pope Leo XII, in January 1850, condemned the Bible Societies and admitted the fact that the distribution of Scripture has "long been condemned by the holy chair." Dear Catholic friend, why do you think Rome prohibited Catholics, and others, from reading the Bible? Why do you think they killed over 50 million people and called them heretics for reading and believing the Holy Scriptures? Why did Pope Pius VII say that the Bible causes men more harm than benefit? Why would God's word cause harm? You see, the Devil knows that if you read the Bible with the intention of learning the truth, you will FLY from the Catholic religion. Over hundreds of years, the Catholic religion, headed by the pope, did unimaginable cruelties to Bible-believers. They were burned, tortured, imprisoned, banished, etc. by the pope because they would only believe the Bible. Lord willing, I'm going to do a review of J. A. Wylie's Edited by geomizzi, Dec 15 2008, 03:58 AM.



autoimmune	Dec 15 2008, 01:13 AM Post #5
Advanced Member Posts: 179 Group: Members Member #4,846 Joined: August 9, 2008	I suspect the OP's linked article is a forgery meant solely to discredit Catholicism. The article, which focuses quite a bit on the issue of papal infallibility, was written in 1854. The RC doctrine of papal infallibility was not defined dogmatically until the First Vatican Council of 1870--16 years AFTER this article was supposedly written. In a addition, the perspective is not that of someone trained in Roman Catholic doctrine and belief (which the author would have been had he really been a priest), but reflects the misundertsandings held by many Protestants about all things Catholic. For that reason, I doubt its veracity . . . and believe it is as far from the spirit of Christ as the author seems to think Catholics are. Mary Ellen



geomizzi	Dec 15 2008, 03:50 AM Post #6
Advanced Member Posts: 115 Group: Members Member #1,620 Joined: August 10, 2007	THE ROMAN MIRACLE A PRETTY MAID, A PROTESTANT, WAS TO A CATHOLIC WED; TO LOVE ALL BIBLE TRUTHS AND TALES, QUITE EARLY SHE'S BEEN BRED. IT SORELY GRIEVED HER HUSBAND'S HEART THAT SHE WOULD NOT COMPLY, AND JOIN THE MOTHER CHURCH OF ROME AND HERETICS DENY. SO DAY BY DAY HE FLATTERED HER BUT STILL SHE SAW NO GOOD WOULD EVER COME FROM BOWING DOWN TO IDOLS MADE OF WOOD. THE MASS, THE HOST, THE MIRACLES, WERE MADE BUT TO DECEIVE; AND TRANSUBSTANTIATION, TOO, SHE'D NEVER DARE BELIEVE. HE WENT TO SEE HIS CLERGYMAN AND TOLD HIM HIS SAD TALE "MY WIFE IS AN UNBELIEVER, SIR; YOU CAN PERHAPS PREVAIL; FOR ALL YOUR ROMISH MIRACLES MY WIFE HAS STRONG AVERSION. TO REALLY WORK A MIRACLE MAY LEAD TO HER CONVERSION." THE PRIEST WENT WITH THE GENTLEMAN HE THOUGHT TO GAIN A PRIZE. HE SAID, "I WILL CONVERT HER, SIR, AND OPEN BOTH HER EYES." SO WHEN THEY CAME INTO THE HOUSE, THE HUSBAND LOUDLY CRIED, "THE PRIEST HAS COME TO DINE WITH US!" "HE'S WELCOME," SHE REPLIED. AND WHEN, AT LAST, THE MEAL WAS O'ER, THE PRIEST AT ONCE BEGAN, TO TEACH HIS HOSTESS ALL ABOUT THE SINFUL STATE OF MAN. THE GREATNESS OF OUR SAVIOR'S LOVE, WHICH CHRISTIANS CAN'T DENY. TO GIVE HIMSELF A SACRIFICE AND FOR OUR SINS TO DIE. "I WILL RETURN TOMORROW, LASS, PREPARE SOME BREAD AND WINE; THE SACRAMENTAL MIRACLE WILL STOP YOUR SOUL'S DECLINE." "I'LL BAKE THE BREAD," THE LADY SAID. "YOU MAY," HE DID REPLY. "AND WHEN YOU'VE SEEN THIS MIRACLE, CONVINCED YOU'LL BE, SAY I." THE PRIEST DID COME ACCORDINGLY, THE BREAD AND WINE DID BLESS. THE LADY ASKED, "SIR, IS IT CHANGED?" THE PRIEST ANSWERED, "YES, IT'S CHANGED FROM COMMON BREAD AND WINE TO TRULY FLESH AND BLOOD. BEGORRA LASS, THIS POWER OF MINE HAS CHANGED IT INTO GOD!" SO HAVING BLESSED THE BREAD AND WINE, TO EAT THEY DID PREPARE THE LADY SAID UNTO THE PRIEST "I WARN YOU TO TAKE CARE. FOR HALF AN OUNCE OF ARSENIC WAS MIXED RIGHT IN THE BATTER, BUT SINCE YOU HAVE ITS NATURE CHANGED IT CANNOT REALLY MATTER." THE PRIEST WAS STRUCK REAL DUMB, HE LOOKED AS PALE AS DEATH. THE BREAD AND WINE FELL FROM HIS HANDS, AND HE DID GASP FOR BREATH. "BRING ME MY HORSE!" THE PRIEST CRIED, "THIS IS A CURSED HOME!" THE LADY REPLIED, "BEGONE; TIS YOU WHO SHARES THE CURSE OF ROME!" THE HUSBAND, TOO, HE SAT SURPRISED, AND NOT A WORD DID SAY. AT LENGTH HE SPOKE, "MY DEAR," SAID HE, "THE PRIEST HAS RUN AWAY. TO GULP SUCH MUMMERY AND TRIPE, I'M NOT FOR SURE QUITE ABLE; I'LL GO WITH YOU AND WE'LL RENOUNCE THIS ROMAN CATHOLIC FABLE." AUTHOR UNKNOWN (Taken from Mystery Babylon by Ralph Woodrow)



autoimmune	Dec 15 2008, 11:10 AM Post #7
Advanced Member Posts: 179 Group: Members Member #4,846 Joined: August 9, 2008	Your personal bias is showing, geomizzi, not some deep spiritual discernment as you may think. It cannot be discernment because that arises from, is based on, and always expressed in Love . . . and there is no sense of Love in what you posted; only unrecognized fear. Mary Ellen



w8n4him	Dec 15 2008, 11:31 AM Post #8
Advanced Member Posts: 1,285 Group: Advanced Members Member #1,473 Joined: July 6, 2007	autoimmune Dec 15 2008, 01:13 AM I suspect the OP's linked article is a forgery meant solely to discredit Catholicism. The article, which focuses quite a bit on the issue of papal infallibility, was written in 1854. The RC doctrine of papal infallibility was not defined dogmatically until the First Vatican Council of 1870--16 years AFTER this article was supposedly written. In a addition, the perspective is not that of someone trained in Roman Catholic doctrine and belief (which the author would have been had he really been a priest), but reflects the misundertsandings held by many Protestants about all things Catholic. For that reason, I doubt its veracity . . . and believe it is as far from the spirit of Christ as the author seems to think Catholics are. Mary Ellen I did a huge study on this topic and these authors/documents, etc., and there is no doubt in my mind whatsoever that they are authentic. Being raised a Roman Catholic I have personal knowledge of many of things spoken of in these article. I do not believe it is a forgery.
	Isaiah 57:1The righteous perisheth, and no man layeth it to heart: and merciful men are taken away, none considering that the righteous is taken away from the evil to come. 2He shall enter into peace: they shall rest in their beds, each one walking in his uprightness. Isaiah 53:4 Surely he hath borne our griefs, and carried our sorrows: yet we did esteem him stricken, smitten of God, and afflicted.


w8n4him	Dec 15 2008, 11:33 AM Post #9
Advanced Member Posts: 1,285 Group: Advanced Members Member #1,473 Joined: July 6, 2007	autoimmune Dec 15 2008, 11:10 AM Your personal bias is showing, geomizzi, not some deep spiritual discernment as you may think. It cannot be discernment because that arises from, is based on, and always expressed in Love . . . and there is no sense of Love in what you posted; only unrecognized fear. Mary Ellen And again, I must disagree with you, this post is not out of fear, but merely demonstrating one of the biggest false doctrines promoted by catholicsim.
	Isaiah 57:1The righteous perisheth, and no man layeth it to heart: and merciful men are taken away, none considering that the righteous is taken away from the evil to come. 2He shall enter into peace: they shall rest in their beds, each one walking in his uprightness. Isaiah 53:4 Surely he hath borne our griefs, and carried our sorrows: yet we did esteem him stricken, smitten of God, and afflicted.


domino	Dec 15 2008, 11:49 AM Post #10
Advanced Member Posts: 390 Group: Members Member #2,560 Joined: January 8, 2008	The treatment of dissenters by the Roman Catholic Church throughout history, well documented, speaks volumes about the true heart and motives of many of this churches leaders and doctrine. Therefore I do not trust the RCC simply because of the fruit it has borne.
	"For now we see through a glass, darkly; but then face to face: now I know in part; but then shall I know even as also I am known."


autoimmune	Dec 15 2008, 12:07 PM Post #11
Advanced Member Posts: 179 Group: Members Member #4,846 Joined: August 9, 2008	Not trusting a particular church is one thing; trashing its beliefs because you either don't understand them or fear them is another. I study the beliefs of other Christians so I can know what I believe in or don't, not so I can spend my time trashing other religions or Christians because I "know" I am right and they are wrong. That is the oldest sin in the book . . . the one Adam and Eve began this whole mess with . . . and the one that will be the end time test for Christians. When will Christians ever get that simple truth . . . eating from the tree of knowledge of good and evil means we think we are right and others are wrong about everything connected to God. Only LOVE can discern because its purpose and goal is fulfilling the will of God; not self-righteous. Please, do not try to tell me that the purpose and goal of the opening post and the one following on RC eucharist was Love. It was pure self-righteousness. Mary Ellen



Ruth	Dec 15 2008, 12:08 PM Post #12
Advanced Member Posts: 1,432 Group: Advanced Members Member #4,840 Joined: August 9, 2008	I believe the Catholic church has many false doctrines, but we should not just speak of the Catholic church with condemnation, the Protestant church has its own horrible history. In this country alone we had slavery, the Salem witch trials and more. If a Catholic is reading this will they find love here or just condemnation?



w8n4him	Dec 15 2008, 12:17 PM Post #13
Advanced Member Posts: 1,285 Group: Advanced Members Member #1,473 Joined: July 6, 2007	Do you think there is something wrong by pointing out false doctrine, whether it be RC or Protestant? False is false and people should be alert to it. I do not see any self-righteousness in the op.
	Isaiah 57:1The righteous perisheth, and no man layeth it to heart: and merciful men are taken away, none considering that the righteous is taken away from the evil to come. 2He shall enter into peace: they shall rest in their beds, each one walking in his uprightness. Isaiah 53:4 Surely he hath borne our griefs, and carried our sorrows: yet we did esteem him stricken, smitten of God, and afflicted.


autoimmune	Dec 15 2008, 12:28 PM Post #14
Advanced Member Posts: 179 Group: Members Member #4,846 Joined: August 9, 2008	w8n4him Dec 15 2008, 11:31 AM I did a huge study on this topic and these authors/documents, etc., and there is no doubt in my mind whatsoever that they are authentic. I'm sorry, W8n4him, but there is no way the OP article can be authentic when the author writes of the RC doctrine of infallibility as a problem 16 years BEFORE it became a doctrine. The author is evidently writing from hindsight at a future date and did not even bother to check basic information on the topic, which places everything else he wrote in question as well. For instance, the author writes as if the doctrine of infallibility means nothing the church does or says can be said to be wrong by Catholics. The truth is that it does not mean that at all. It refers ONLY to doctrines given ex cathedra, something very rarely done. The author of this article had no conception of that, which is something I find hard to believe if he actually had been a priest. There were many other biased statements that showed a lack of understanding of the basics about Catholicism a former priest should have had. Tell me, do you accept this article because it is truth or because it appeals emotionally to what you WANT to believe about others who differ from you in doctrine now? w8n4him Being raised a Roman Catholic I have personal knowledge of many of things spoken of in these article. I do not believe it is a forgery. Being raised a Roman Catholic myself and having studied 4 years of RC theology before withdrawing from the church and all organized religion, I have to respectfully disagree with you. My response was not based on whether I agree with the information presented, only that it could not be authentic because it had a glaring error that made it impossible for it to be accurate. And that error makes it suspect in intention. Mary Ellen [/quote]



gibby62	Dec 15 2008, 12:29 PM Post #15
Adopted Child of God Posts: 2,987 Group: Advanced Members Member #4,933 Joined: October 29, 2008	Can we point to any denomination and call it correct??
	Put on the full armor of God so that you can take your stand against the devil's schemes. For our struggle is not against flesh and blood, but against the rulers, against the authorities, against the powers of this dark world and against the spiritual forces of evil in the heavenly realms. Eph 6:11-12


autoimmune	Dec 15 2008, 12:33 PM Post #16
Advanced Member Posts: 179 Group: Members Member #4,846 Joined: August 9, 2008	w8n4him Dec 15 2008, 12:17 PM Do you think there is something wrong by pointing out false doctrine, whether it be RC or Protestant? False is false and people should be alert to it. I do not see any self-righteousness in the op. Then simply say you believe the teachings of the Catholic Church to be wrong concerning their sacraments of reconciliation and the eucharist. There is no need for slander or calumny. Self-righteous is an integral part of the sins of slander and calumny. It is the driving force behind them. Mary Ellen



w8n4him	Dec 15 2008, 12:36 PM Post #17
Advanced Member Posts: 1,285 Group: Advanced Members Member #1,473 Joined: July 6, 2007	gibby62 Dec 15 2008, 12:29 PM Can we point to any denomination and call it correct?? No, I don't believe there are any.......the RCC is the mother harlot of revelations, and the rest are her daughters.
	Isaiah 57:1The righteous perisheth, and no man layeth it to heart: and merciful men are taken away, none considering that the righteous is taken away from the evil to come. 2He shall enter into peace: they shall rest in their beds, each one walking in his uprightness. Isaiah 53:4 Surely he hath borne our griefs, and carried our sorrows: yet we did esteem him stricken, smitten of God, and afflicted.


w8n4him	Dec 15 2008, 12:37 PM Post #18
Advanced Member Posts: 1,285 Group: Advanced Members Member #1,473 Joined: July 6, 2007	Mary Ellen, I'll respond to your post in a bit.
	Isaiah 57:1The righteous perisheth, and no man layeth it to heart: and merciful men are taken away, none considering that the righteous is taken away from the evil to come. 2He shall enter into peace: they shall rest in their beds, each one walking in his uprightness. Isaiah 53:4 Surely he hath borne our griefs, and carried our sorrows: yet we did esteem him stricken, smitten of God, and afflicted.


autoimmune	Dec 15 2008, 12:42 PM Post #19
Advanced Member Posts: 179 Group: Members Member #4,846 Joined: August 9, 2008	domino Dec 15 2008, 11:49 AM The treatment of dissenters by the Roman Catholic Church throughout history, well documented, speaks volumes about the true heart and motives of many of this churches leaders and doctrine. Therefore I do not trust the RCC simply because of the fruit it has borne. Study some history of the Reformation, domino. It wasn't pretty on EITHER side. Should we begin pointing to the Salem witch trials? Protestant teachings on slavery in America? The hundreds of equally compelling misdeeds of Protestants throughout history, even up to the present day TV evangelistic teachings on the gospel of prosperity that steals from Christians in a way that rivals the RC church throughout history? Or about many other Protestant doctrines taught by numerous denominations that are completely antithetical to the gospel of Christ? This is why gibby made the correct statement (imo) that no denomination can claim innocence and the perfect understanding of Christ. Disagree, but do it respectfully. Do not rely on rumor, misunderstanding, or slander simply because it appeals emotionally to a personal bias against Catholicism. Mary Ellen



Ruth	Dec 15 2008, 12:47 PM Post #20
Advanced Member Posts: 1,432 Group: Advanced Members Member #4,840 Joined: August 9, 2008	we can argue doctrine till we turn blue in the face, wars and abuses have been fought over doctrine for 2000 years, nothing has changed. We can point out our differences in doctrine, but in love. Remember we are not saved through doctrine, but the saving grace of our Lord Jesus Christ.



1 user reading this topic (1 Guest and 0 Anonymous)


Go to Next Page
« Previous Topic · Testimony Room · Next Topic »

Pages:
1
2
3