...
Admittedly (again very hard for me to expose), my main problem/doubt is with #3, due to a trauma I went through. I have no particular issue with #1 and #2. Mainly, because they are functional areas. Someone has to baptize. Someone has to give communion. So why not a priest. "Someone" has to carry out the physical action. And it makes sense to me that there ought to be a dedicated group of people who carry out that function. Organizationally speaking, it makes sense. You want to maintain order. You don't want just haphazard things happening.
However #3 strikes me as something which is not functional. It seems to me it's something which has been superimposed. Again defenders will say: the absolution, a prayer the priest recites on the person after confession, needs to be done physically in order for the Mystery of the forgiveness of sins to be complete. And I'm having a lot of trouble with that. Again, this could be due to my "trauma" which I went through, but I honestly can't intellectually accept the explanations given thereby proponents of this view.
I have spoken with several people about this from within the Coptic Church, and I have not received a convincing answer. My fear is this: Am I rejecting this idea because of my personal trauma? As a wise woman said: "throwing the baby with the bathwater". Or is my resistance to the idea objectively valid? What bothers me even more, is I know if I go to the Catholics or Orthodox they'll say, you must confess. And if you go to the Protestants, they'll say you don't have to. Who is right?
Now, I know that there are some useful aspects of talking to a person about your sins and weaknesses. We all need accountability and advice. And in essence theory a priest can fulfill that role. However, in my experience, a priests (at least the ones I've met) do a generally horrible job regarding accountability and advice. I have not met a priest who genuinely cares, or follows a long with me (here comes my personal experience, which could form a bias and I admit that). So to me, there are plenty of people out there other than priests who can provide accountability for you and give you better advice, Christian counsellors for example.
The problem is that the coptic orthodox church doesn't say that confession to a priest is there to help the sinner overcome or heal from their sins, or at least this is not the point they highlight. What they say is that this is the only way for God to forgive your sins, irregardless if you're actually "healed" or not. My perception from their explanations (and again it could be painted by my bias) is that the reason you have to confess to a priest, is that so you can have forgiveness to your sins. God's forgiveness is blocked by the priest "remitting your sin" and God's forgiveness can not complete without the priest's express remission of sins.
...
And they couple this with their argument for the Traditions of the church which Jesus has passed on to the disciples orally, but were not written down. This an argument of the "Holy Traditions". For example they claim that Jesus taught the disciples the "Liturgical prayers" and other types of prayers. So although they admit that the Bible is the authoritative word of God, they also say that there are other aspects, verbally passed down, which are also part of the teaching teachings of Christ.
With these arguments they affirm the necessary role of the priesthood in the forgiveness of sins. They use other arguments such as: God has setup the Church through people. And they refer to Old Testament Church, etc. I've searched on this and I have seen people debate about the "verb tense" used in John 20:22-23. Here is an article which summarizes this view: https://lifehopeandtruth.com/change/forgiveness/john-20-23/. Their The conclusion in that article is that the authority given to the disciples is to recognize the completed action of Christ (IE forgiveness of sins of the truly repentant). So they aren't forgiving sins, rather they are recognizing that a truly repentant man has had his sins forgiven already by Christ.
...
Again the reason this is important to me, is because it is tied closely to Salvation and Hope in Salvation. Someone might tell me then, why don't you just do it and be done. I have very strong rejection to this. Mainly due to the fact that it shows to me a God who has chosen to put a human (and I don't mean Christ) intermediary between Him and I. The question which arises then is if God requires a priest to forgive sins, what about my personal relationship with Him? Is that even possible? As far as I can tell a personal relationship with Christ revolves around the free sacrifice of Christ to forgive our sins and the acceptance of this gift by the individual. From their there the relationship can flourish. However, if a priest is required to have this forgiveness of sins, then can there exist any actual meaningful relationship with God outside of the inter-mediation of the priest? It shows to me that God doesn't really care about me as a person. He only cares if I follow some rules. It shows to me that God is not interested in having a personal relationship with me. He doesn't even want to forgive me my sins unless I go to a priest and confess them. Well, I'm sinning all the time. It creates in me this sense of anger or rebellion against this god who puts arbitrary rules and says, if you don't follow those rules, then sorry, you're lost. I can not reconcile this in my mind with a personal loving God. (I don't want to get in an argument about God's love and Justice etc)
This is honestly , giving me such a hard time.
...