Karlo Broussard and host Cy Kellett work through several reading of scripture that appear to be against confession to priests.
Transcript:
Cy: The idea that priests have been especially commissioned to forgive sins and have the power to forgive sins is sometimes challenged on the basis of particularly the Catholics defend it. This is using John’s Gospel at the near the end of John’s Gospel, and you might, and I might ask you to help me here with chapter and verse. There’s the part where Jesus, we would say, commissions them to go out and forgive sins, but there’s a Protestant response to that, that really what Jesus is doing is asking them to preach the forgiveness of sin. So you go ahead and give the Bible verse because I don’t have it in front of me and I’m very Catholic in my recollection of chapter and verse.
Karlo: All right, yeah, that’s John, chapter 20, verse 23, where Jesus tells the apostles on the night of the resurrection, “If you forgive the sins of any, they are forgiven. If you retain the sins, they are retained.” As Catholics in our tradition, we have appealed to that biblical text as support and revelation of the sacrament of reconciliation. However, as you mentioned, many of our Protestant friends will respond and say, well, what Jesus really meant there is that the apostles were to go out and preach the forgiveness of sins and God would forgive or retain based on how people would respond to the Gospel message of the forgiveness of sins.
Now, in response, first of all, Cy, there’s nothing in the context that speaks of preaching. And so that’s an important point to point out. Why? Because the verb “forgive” doesn’t mean “preach.” And so if there is nothing in the context to suggest that we should interpret the action verb of forgiving as preaching, well then we’re justified in reading the action verb to forgive as forgiving, which is essentially different from preaching. You know, when I tell my children to forgive each other, if I tell Catherine, my daughter, to forgive her 14-year-old brother Elijah for doing something, I’m not telling her, “Hey, Catherine, go and preach to him that he needs to repent of his sin and believe in the Gospel.” If she were to do that, that would be fantastic and I would be a happy Catholic daddy. But when I say, “Go and forgive, you know, forgive your brother,” I mean, don’t hold him accountable and don’t hold it against him. I don’t mean go and preach.
So the very meaning of the action verb “to forgive” doesn’t entail preaching. And given that there’s nothing in the context to suggest preaching, we are justified to read the action verb “to forgive” in its natural sense.
Secondly, it’s the disciples in the text that are the subject of the action verb “to forgive.” So yes, God ultimately is the one forgiving, but Jesus clearly is making the disciples, the apostles, here the agents of those who administer the forgiveness of sins.
And then finally, and I think this is quite persuasive, Cy. I go into great detail on this in my book *Meeting the Protestant Response*. The command here in John 20:23 is something new. If Jesus were merely commanding the apostles to go and preach the forgiveness of sins, then this command would not be something new. For we read about that in Mark 6, 7, and 12 that the apostles went out two by two and preached that men should repent. But yet we know that this command is something new. Never did Jesus breathe on the apostles except here. That’s something new. Never did Jesus speak with the language of forgiving and retaining sins. That’s something new.
And so this command in John 20:23 is something new. And therefore we can conclude that Jesus is not merely commanding the apostles to go out and preach the forgiveness of sins, but rather, as we have traditionally interpreted this, Jesus has given the apostles the authority to forgive sins and in some cases to make the judgment not to forgive sins. And that is at its core the very essence of the sacrament of reconciliation.
Cy: Okay, so this is what you do. And this would suggest a Catholic reading of that scripture in John’s Gospel is correct. But the Protestant will follow up with, look, this is not just in John’s Gospel. This is depicted in Luke’s Gospel as well. And in Luke’s Gospel, it’s clear that Jesus is telling them, go out and preach the forgiveness of sins.
Karlo: Yeah, this is a great follow-up. And in fact, it’s Luke 24:47 that some Protestants will appeal to, where Luke does record Jesus telling the apostles, giving them an instruction to go out and preach the forgiveness of sins. So it would seem that Luke is clarifying what Jesus meant by his words “forgive” and “retain sins” in John chapter 20, verse 23.
But in response, again, as I point out in my book *Meeting the Protestant Response*, the objection wrongly assumes that it’s the same event and the same exchange. The objection assumes that what Luke’s recording in this instruction to preach the forgiveness of sins is the same exchange between Jesus and the apostles as what John records in John 20:23. But as I mentioned, that’s a wrong assumption. That’s a false assumption.
And the evidence for this is that in Luke chapter 24, Luke starts off in the chapter, Cy, identifying the day of the resurrection on the first day of the week at early dawn, there in verse one, that very day, there in verse 13, that same hour in verse 33 of Luke 24. But what’s interesting, Cy, in verses 41 through 42, where we begin to talk about the instructions that Jesus is giving to the apostles, which would include the preaching of the forgiveness of sins, Luke drops the time cues suggesting that he has moved on beyond the night of the resurrection.
Furthermore, Luke summarizes the instructions. Luke gives a list of instructions that Jesus gives to the apostles in which we have the instruction to preach the forgiveness of sins. Well, that listing of instructions, Cy, seems to be the very instructions that Jesus gave the apostles during the 40 days before the Ascension. If you read Luke 24:47 and following, you’ll discover that in that listing of instructions, Jesus is telling the apostles to preach his name to all nations, to begin in Jerusalem, telling them about the Father’s promise that he will send power from on high in verse 49.
Well, guess what? Those are all the instructions that Luke records Jesus giving the apostles in Acts 1:1-10 during the 40 days before his ascension. So the instruction to preach the forgiveness of sins in Luke 24:47, Cy, is not the exchange that took place on the night of the resurrection in John chapter 20, verse 23. Therefore, our Protestant friends cannot appeal to Luke 24:47 as evidence for this alleged proper meaning of “forgive” and “retain sins,” namely to preach the forgiveness of sins.
So not only is the general objection problematic for the reasons that I gave earlier, but even the specific reason why a Protestant makes this conclusion, we can conclude that this objection fails and has no persuasive force against the Catholic sacramental interpretation of John chapter 20, verse 23.
Cy: That’s a Protestant objection to the Catholic faith, particularly the Catholic belief in the sacrament of confession and the ability of priests to forgive sins by a power conveyed by Christ. Well, those are pretty good objections, but as you can see with Dr. Broussard’s work, those objections don’t overcome the Catholic reading, but actually clarify it as you see with a careful reading.
So maybe you’ve got a Protestant objection to the Catholic faith. The number is 888-318-7884.