How can Catholics claim that priests forgive sins?

Many will use these verses against the idea of ​​confession to a priest. God will forgive sins, they will say, preclude the possibility that there is a priest who forgives sins. Furthermore, Hebrews 3: 1 and 7: 22-27 tell us that Jesus is, "the ... high priest of our confession" and that there are not "many priests", but one in the New Testament: Jesus Christ. Furthermore, if Jesus is the "only mediator between God and men" (I Tim. 2: 5), how can Catholics reasonably claim that priests act as mediators in the Sacrament of Confession?

START WITH THE OLD MAN

The Catholic Church recognizes what Scripture unequivocally declares: it is God who forgives our sins. But this is not the end of the story. Leviticus 19: 20-22 is equally unequivocal:

If a man is found carnally with a woman ... they will not be put to death ... But he will bring a sacrifice for himself to the Lord ... And the priest will make atonement for him with the ram of the offering of guilt before the Lord for his sin he has shop assistant; and the sin he has committed will be forgiven him.

Apparently, a priest used as an instrument of forgiveness from God does not in some way detract from the fact that it was God who made the forgiveness. God was the primary cause of forgiveness; the priest was the secondary or instrumental cause. Therefore, God being the forgiveness of sins in Isaiah 43:25 and Psalm 103: 3 does not in any way eliminate the possibility that there is a ministerial priesthood instituted by God to communicate his forgiveness.

OUT WITH THE OLD MAN

Many Protestants will admit that priests act as mediators of forgiveness in the Old Testament. "Anyway," they will say, "The people of God had priests in the Old Testament. Jesus is our only priest in the New Testament. " The question is, could it be that "our great God and Savior Jesus Christ" (Titus 2:13) did something similar to what he did, like God, in the Old Testament? Could he have instituted a priesthood to mediate his forgiveness in the New Testament?

IN WITH THE NEW

Just as God empowered his priests to be instruments of forgiveness in the Old Testament, the God / man Jesus Christ delegated authority to his New Testament ministers to also act as mediators of reconciliation. Jesus made it extraordinarily clear in John 20: 21-23:

Jesus said to them again: “Peace be with you. As the Father sent me, so I also send you. " And when he said this, he blew on them and said to them: “Receive the Holy Spirit. If you forgive someone's sins, they are forgiven; if you keep someone's sins, they are kept. "

Having been raised from the dead, our Lord was here instructing his apostles to carry out his work just before ascending to heaven. "As the Father sent me, I also send you." What did the Father send Jesus to do? All Christians agree that he sent Christ to be the only true mediator between God and men. As such, Christ was to infallibly proclaim the Gospel (cf. Luke 4: 16-21), to reign supreme as king of kings and lord of lords (cf. Rev 19:16); and above all, he had to redeem the world through the forgiveness of sins (cf. I Peter 2: 21-25, Mark 2: 5-10).

The New Testament makes it very clear that Christ sent the apostles and their successors to carry out this same mission. Announce the Gospel with the authority of Christ (cf. Matthew 28: 18-20), govern the Church in his stead (cf. Luke 22: 29-30) and sanctify it through the sacraments, especially the Eucharist (cf. John 6:54, I Cor. 11: 24-29) and for our purpose here, Confession.

John 20: 22-23 is none other than Jesus who emphasizes an essential aspect of the priestly ministry of the apostles: To forgive the sins of men in the person of Christ: “Of those who forgive sins, they are forgiven, whose sins you keep are kept . In addition, auricular confession is highly implicated here. The only way the apostles can either forgive or hold back sins is first of all by hearing the sins confessed, and then judging whether the penitent should be acquitted or not.

FORGET OR PROCLATE?

Many Protestants and various quasi-Christian sects claim that John 20:23 is to be seen as Christ simply repeating "the great commission" of Matthew 28:19 and Luke 24:47 using different words that mean the same thing:

Go therefore and make disciples of all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit.

... and that repentance and forgiveness of sins should be preached in his name to all nations ...

Commenting on John 20:23 in his book, Romanism - The Relentless Roman Catholic Assault on the Gospel of Jesus Christ! (White Horse Publications, Huntsville Alabama, 1995), p. 100, the Protestant apologist Robert Zins writes:

It is evident that the commission for evangelization is closely linked to the commission to proclaim the forgiveness of sin through faith in Jesus Christ.

Mr. Zin's claim is that John 20:23 is not saying that the apostles would forgive sins; rather, that they would simply proclaim the forgiveness of sins. The only problem with this theory is that it runs directly into the text of John 20. "If you forgive someone's sins ... if you keep someone's sins." The text cannot say it more clearly: this is more than just an announcement of the forgiveness of sins: this "commission" from the Lord communicates the power to truly forgive sins themselves.

FREQUENT CONFESSION

The next question for many when they see the simple words of St. John is: "Why do we no longer hear about confession to a priest in the rest of the New Testament?" The fact is: it is not necessary. How many times does God have to tell us something before we believe it? He has given us the correct form for baptism only once (Matt. 28:19), yet all Christians accept this teaching.

Be that as it may, there are multiple texts dealing with the confession and forgiveness of sins through the minister of the New Covenant. I will mention only a few:

II Cor. 02:

And also to those who have forgiven something. Because, what I forgave, if I forgave something, for your love I did it in the person of Christ (DRV).

Many can respond to this text by citing modern Bible translations, such as the RSVCE:

What I forgave, if I forgave something, was for your good in the presence of Christ (added emphasis).

St. Paul is said to be simply forgiving someone in the way a lay person can forgive someone for the wrong done against him. The Greek word "prosopon" can be translated either way. And I should note here that good Catholics will also discuss this point. This is an understandable and valid objection. However, I don't agree with it for four reasons:

1. Not only the Douay-Reims, but the King James Version of the Bible - which no one would accuse of being a Catholic translation - translates prosopon as a "person".

2. The early Christians, who spoke and wrote in Greek koine, at the Councils of Ephesus (431 AD) and Chalcedon (451 AD), used prosopon to refer to the "person" of Jesus Christ.

3. Even if one translates the text as Saint Paul by forgiving "in the presence of Christ", the context still seems to indicate that he has forgiven the sins of others. And note: St. Paul specifically stated that he was not forgiving anyone for the offenses committed against him (see II Cor. 2: 5). Every Christian can and must do it. He said he made forgiveness "for the love of God" and "in the person (or presence) of Christ". The context seems to indicate that he is forgiving sins that do not involve him personally.

4. Only three chapters later, Saint Paul gives us the reason why he could forgive the sins of others: "All this comes from God, who through Christ reconciled us to himself and gave us the ministry of reconciliation" (II Cor . 5: 18). Some will argue that the "ministry of reconciliation" in verse 18 is identical to the "message of reconciliation" in verse 19. In other words, St. Paul simply refers to a declarative power here. I do not agree. I argue that St. Paul uses distinct terms precisely because he refers to something more than the simple "message of reconciliation", but to the same ministry of reconciliation that was of Christ. Christ did much more than preach a message; he also forgave sins.

James 5: 14-17:

Is there anyone sick among you? Let him call for the elders of the church, and ask them to pray about him, anointing him with oil in the name of the Lord; and the prayer of faith will save the sick and the Lord will lift him up; and if he has committed sins, he will be forgiven. Therefore confess your sins to one another and pray for one another so that you may be healed. The prayer of a righteous man has great power in its effects. Elijah was a man of the same nature with ourselves and prayed earnestly that it wouldn't rain ... and ... it wouldn't rain ...

When it comes to "suffering"; St. James says: "Let him pray". “Are you happy? Let him sing praise. "But when it comes to illness and personal sins, he tells his readers that they have to go to the" elders "- not just anyone - to receive this" anointing "and forgiveness of sins.

Some will object and point out that verse 16 says to confess our sins "to one another" and pray "for one another". Isn't James simply encouraging us to confess our sins to a close friend so that we can help each other to overcome our shortcomings?

The context seems to disagree with this interpretation for two main reasons:

1. St. James had just told us to go to the priest in verse 14 for healing and forgiveness of sins. Hence, verse 16 begins with the word then: a conjunction that would seem to connect verse 16 to verses 14 and 15. The context seems to indicate "the elder" as the one to whom we confess our sins.

2. Ephesians 5:21 uses this same phrase. "Be subject to one another out of reverence for Christ." But the context limits the meaning of "one another" specifically for a man and wife, not just anyone. Similarly, the context of James 5 would seem to limit the confession of defects "to one another" to the specific relationship between "anyone" and the "elder" or "priest" (Gr - presbuteros).

A PRIEST OR A LOT?

A great obstacle to confession for many Protestants (including me when I was a Protestant) is that it presupposes a priesthood. As I said above, Jesus is indicated in Scripture as "the apostle and high priest of our confession". Former priests were numerous, as Hebrews 7:23 says, now we have a priest: Jesus Christ. The question is: how does the idea of ​​priests and confessions fit in here? Is there a priest or are there many?

I Peter 2: 5-9 gives us some insights:

... and like living stones, let yourself be built in a spiritual house, to be a holy priesthood, to offer acceptable spiritual sacrifices to God through Jesus Christ ... But you are a chosen race, a real priesthood, a holy nation, the people of God ...

If Jesus is the only priest in the New Testament in the strict sense, then we have a contradiction in Sacred Scripture. This, of course, is absurd. I Peter clearly teaches all believers to be members of a holy priesthood. The priest / believers do not take away the unique priesthood of Christ, rather, as members of his body establish it on earth.

COMPLETE AND ACTIVE PARTICIPATION

If you understand the very Catholic and very biblical notion of participatio, these problematic and other texts become relatively easy to understand. Yes, Jesus Christ is the "only mediator between God and men" just like I Tim. 2: 5 says. The Bible is clear. However, Christians are also called to be mediators in Christ. When we intercede for each other or share the Gospel with someone, we act as mediators of the love and grace of God in the one true mediator, Christ Jesus, through the gift of participatio in Christ, the only mediator between God and men (see I Timothy 2: 1-7, I Timothy 4:16, Romans 10: 9-14). In a certain sense, all Christians can say with Saint Paul: "... it is no longer I who live, but Christ who lives in me ..." (Galatians 2:20)

PRIESTS BETWEEN PRIESTS

If all Christians are priests, why do Catholics claim a ministerial priesthood essentially distinct from the universal priesthood? The answer is: God wanted to call a special priesthood among the universal priesthood to minister to his people. This concept is literally as old as Moses.

When St. Peter taught us the universal priesthood of all believers, he referred specifically to Exodus 19: 6 where God alluded to ancient Israel as "a kingdom of priests and a holy nation". St. Peter reminds us that there was a universal priesthood among the people of God in the Old Testament, just like in the New Testament. But this did not preclude the existence of a ministerial priesthood within that universal priesthood (see Exodus 19:22, Exodus 28 and Numbers 3: 1-12).

Similarly, we have a universal "Royal Priesthood" in the New Testament, but we also have an ordained clergy who have the priestly authority conferred on them by Christ to carry out his ministry of reconciliation as we have seen.

Truly exceptional authority

A final couple of texts that we will consider are Matt. 16:19 and 18:18. In particular, we will examine Christ's words to Peter and the apostles: "Whatever you bind on earth will be bound in heaven, and everything you lose on earth will be melted in heaven." As CCC 553 says, here Christ communicated not only the authority "to pronounce doctrinal judgments and make disciplinary decisions in the Church", but also "the authority to absolve sins" from the apostles.

These words are disturbing, even disturbing, for many. And understandably. How could God give such authority to men? Yet it does. Jesus Christ, who alone has the power to open and close heaven to men, clearly communicated this authority to the apostles and their successors. This is the forgiveness of sins: reconciling men and women with their heavenly Father. CCC 1445 says in short:

The words bind and loosen mean: whoever you exclude from your communion, will be excluded from communion with God; whoever you receive again in your communion, God will welcome you back in his. Reconciliation with the Church is inseparable from reconciliation with God.