Why I believe in the Sacrament of Confession (Reconciliation)
I am a fairly recent convert to Catholicism compared to most. I have been in full Communion with the Catholic Church for only about 2 and a half years. Remembering my journey to the Church, I remember Confession being one of the harder doctrines to accept. I mean who WANTS to tell all of their deepest darkest fears to another human being? After almost 7 years of reading through Scripture and of Early Church History, I came to accept the fact that Jesus instituted this Sacrament, and if He instituted it, who was I to reject it?
Why do I believe in Confession as a Sacrament? It’s because it’s in the Bible that Jesus gave some men the Authority to do this. Speaking to the Apostles in John 20:21-23 “So Jesus said to them again, "Peace be with you; as the Father has sent Me, I also send you." And when He had said this, He breathed on them and said to them, "Receive the Holy Spirit.”If you forgive the sins of any, their sins have been forgiven them; if you retain the sins of any, they have been retained."
Right here in this verse, Jesus gave the Apostles the Authority to forgive sins. We cannot just ignore passages in the Bible because we don’t like the premise. After reading this, and the other verses that talk about Jesus granting the Apostles the Authority that “whatever you bind on earth will be bound in Heaven and whatever you loose on Earth will be loosed in Heaven” (Matthew 18:18), I thought on it a LOT! I asked myself questions about it.
How were they to forgive sins? My answer to this was only through the power and Authority of Christ Himself. It was Christ that forgave the sins, but acting through the Apostles as His means. When Jesus gave the Apostles the Authority to forgive sins, it wasn’t by their own power, it was a gift of Authority that Jesus gave the Apostles. But at the end of the day, it was still the power and sacrifice of Jesus that makes this possible. This was just the mode that Jesus chose to be the ordinary means of forgiveness in the Church that He founded.
How did they know what sins to forgive? The only possible answer to this is that people had to tell them. I have seen nowhere where Christ granted them the power to peer into people’s souls and identify all sins and grant them absolution for sins that they didn’t even ask to be forgiven. This is shown in John 1:9 “If we confess our sins, he is faithful and just and will forgive us our sins and purify us from all unrighteousness.” And it is specifically talked about in James 5:26 “Therefore confess your sins to each other and pray for each other so that you may be healed.” Here it clearly says we’re to confess our sins to others. With the Apostles clearly being shown to be the ones with the Authority and responsibility to forgive or retain sins, it became clear to me that we were to confess to someone with that same Authority.
What was the reason for it? God can certainly forgive the sins of anyone that simply asks sincerely for forgiveness in prayer, so why did He feel the need to even grant this responsibility, and Authority to do it, to the Apostles? I think it’s because God knows the way humans work. When we are held accountable to each other, when we have to sit down with each other and discuss our faults it not only forces us to verbally confront ourselves and our failings as Christians, it also grants us more reasons to try to stay on the right path because we know if we don’t we’ll have to admit that not only to God, but to ourselves, AND to the person hearing the Confession. This is a powerful (though definitely not fool proof) way to strengthen us further to avoid those sins. It also gives the Priest the chance to help us. It gives them the opportunity to suggest ways to help us avoid those sins in the future. It also allows us to hear affirmation of our forgiveness. Almost nothing I have felt is as freeing as hearing verbally, “In the name of Christ I absolve you of your sins” We are physical beings, and hearing that instead of just assuming it during prayer is a wonderful feeling that brings great peace to your soul and God knew that!
Was this a temporary power that stopped when the Apostles passed away? What would be the point in requiring the Apostles to do this, but then just ending it when they passed away? I believe that Jesus spoke God’s Word perfectly. Something that was good then, would still be good today. What would the purpose be to require early Christians to do this, but not later Christians? I can’t think of a logical reason why he would go through the effort of even saying this to them, if it wasn’t important to our Salvation, and if it was important then, it must still be important today. Again in John 20:21 Jesus said, “as the Father has sent Me, I also send you." This was just before telling them that whose sins they forgive were forgiven, so it is obvious to me that they were to go out and do this, and tell people about it so that they may be able to confess their sins. The only reason I can think of for this is that it was important for everyone to do, not just the people that heard the words spoken to them. It was important then and so must be important now.
If it was a permanent thing, meant to be done for all Christians, as I came to believe, then who would be responsible and still have the Authority to do it today? This was a tougher question to answer for me when I started thinking on it. There are SO many churches today. So many pastors, preachers, and Priests that claim they speak the true word of God. How would I know which ones still had that Authority? The answer came to me upon reading the book of Acts. In Acts 1:20-26 For it is written in the book of Psalms, 'Let his homestead be made desolate, and let no one dwell in it'; and, 'Let another man take his office.' Therefore it is necessary that of the men who have accompanied us all the time that the Lord Jesus went in and out among us-- beginning with the baptism of John until the day that He was taken up from us-- one of these must become a witness with us of His resurrection." So they put forward two men, Joseph called Barsabbas (who was also called Justus), and Matthias. And they prayed and said, "You, Lord, who know the hearts of all men, show which one of these two You have chosen to occupy this ministry and apostleship from which Judas turned aside to go to his own place." And they drew lots for them, and the lot fell to Matthias; and he was added to the eleven apostles.
This was a clear passing on of the Authority of the Apostleship. If it happened when Judas passed why would it not happen when the others were killed or passed away? We see it again with an entirely new Apostle when St. Paul was brought into the Church. This was after Christ had ascended into Heaven, and all of the other Apostles were still alive, so it is evident here that Paul was added to the Apostleship along with the others. This expanded the office of Apostles to 13. So it seems obvious, to me at least, that this was an Authority that was not only passed down, but also expanded when the need for more men to tend the flock of God arose.
If the Apostolic Authority was passed on through an Apostolic Succession as shown in Acts, and that Authority was passed down throughout the ages, which churches still have that spiritual lineage today? When we look at all of the churches today, who can trace themselves back to the Apostles and the bestowing of that Authority? Of the Churches that I have seen, only the Catholic Church and the Eastern Orthodox Churches do, while the Anglican Churches might. Of these, only the Catholic Church existed prior to 1054 AD, when the Eastern Orthodox broke away from the Catholic Church in the Great Schism. I personally chose the Catholic Church not only because of the research I did into Early Church history and the Biblical and historical evidence for their teachings, but also because they were the ONLY Church around for at least 1000 years before someone decided to break off and start their own. They are also one of the very few today that can trace that Apostolic Authority back to the beginning of Christianity.
Confession is also talked about outside of the Bible in many early documents, so we know that it was established and continued on. The Didache (Written between 70-110 AD, so very close to the time of the Apostles) states in Chapter 4 line 14 “In the congregation thou shalt confess thy transgressions, and thou shalt not betake thyself to prayer with an evil conscience. This is the way of life.” So here we have a very early document showing that this confession is still going on, even past the lives of many Apostles. In Chapter 11 line 1 it clearly talks about the office of bishop; “1. Appoint therefore for yourselves bishops and deacons worthy of the Lord, meek men, and not lovers of money, and truthful and approved, for they also minister to you the ministry of the prophets and teachers. “ It should be noted that the chapter in Acts discussing the Succession of Mathias also states the office is a Bishoprick in some translations. This is a direct link to the Authority to forgive sins from the Apostles to the Bishops. Many others throughout early history talk about this as well.
We can read many examples of Reconciliation from the Early Church Fathers. This gives us insight into what the Early Church taught. I believe that these early Christians, so close to Jesus and the Apostles, would have a much better understanding of Scripture than anyone that just picked up and read the Bible today. I believe that Jesus was the perfect teacher, so I also believe that people so close to his time would still have a better grasp of the teachings that He wanted the world to hear and follow.
In the Epistle of Barnabas, Chapter 19 (The Way of Light) (74AD)
"You shall judge righteously. You shall not make a schism, but you shall pacify those that contend by bringing them together. You shall confess your sins. You shall not go to prayer with an evil conscience. This is the way of light"
The Epistle of Ignatius to the Philadelphians talks about Penance (A part of Reconciliation) (110 AD)
In Chapter 3 it says “For as many as are of God and of Jesus Christ are also with the bishop. And as many as shall, in the exercise of penance, return into the unity of the Church, these, too, shall belong to God, that they may live according to Jesus Christ
Chapter 8 also asserts: “For where there is division and wrath, God does not dwell. To all them that repent, the Lord grants forgiveness, if they turn in penitence to the unity of God, and to communion with the bishop.”
St. Irenaeus wrote in Against Heresies (Book I, Chapter 13) Against the Gnostic disciples of Marcus. (189 AD)
"They have deluded many women. . . . Their consciences have been branded as with a hot iron. Some of these women make a public confession, but others are ashamed to do this, and in silence, as if withdrawing from themselves the hope of the life of God, they either apostatize entirely or hesitate between the two courses" (Against Heresies 1:22 [A.D. 189]).
There is of course much more than can be said and read on the topic, but I think this covers most of my own thought process and research into the Sacrament of Reconciliation. If anyone would like to read further on it there are some great sources out there to see where the teaching comes from and the teachings of the early Church on the matter.
http://www.thedidache.com/
http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/11618c.htm
