Audio only:
Some Christians miss or explain away the amazing gift that Jesus gave his Church when he told the Apostles, “Whose sins you forgive are forgiven…” This unique moment is given to us in John 20:23. Karlo Broussard joins us to explain why the most obvious reading is the right one — Christ gave the Apostles the power to forgive sins.
Cy Kellett:
Did Jesus give the church a sacrament of confession or not? Karlo Broussard is next.
Cy Kellett:
Hello, and welcome to Focus, the Catholic Answers podcast for living, understanding, and defending your Catholic faith. I’m Cy Kellett, your host. A series of strange things happened in the 20th chapter of John’s gospel, particularly in verse 23.
Cy Kellett:
These things leave us with a bit of a controversy today about what exactly did Jesus mean when he said to the apostles, “Whose sins you forgive are forgiven them. Whose sins you retain are retained.” Did he mean that we are to go out and proclaim the gospel? When people accept it, we can say, “Your sins are forgiven.” If they don’t accept it, we can say, “Your sins are retained,” or did he mean something else? And what does breathing on them and giving them the Holy Spirit have to do with all of this? Here’s what Karlo Broussard had to say.
Cy Kellett:
Apologist, Karlo Broussard. Thank you for being with us.
Karlo Broussard:
Host of Catholic Answers Live, Cy Kellett, thank you for having me.
Cy Kellett:
You guys all do that to me. You’re the author of several books, one of which is Meeting the Protestant Challenge. You got a forthcoming books, which is also going to meet intellectual challenges posed to Catholics by Protestant folks.
Karlo Broussard:
That’s correct.
Cy Kellett:
But it’ll be a little bit different.
Karlo Broussard:
It will be different.
Cy Kellett:
What will be the form of this?
Karlo Broussard:
Whereas Meeting the Protestant Challenge was addressing objections that took the form how can the church teach X when the Bible says Y which is an alleged contradiction concerning our belief in the Bible and our beliefs as Catholics, my forthcoming book is going to look at ways in which Protestants rebut, counter, object to the classic Catholic arguments that have been given from day one, concerning the papacy, Mary, the saints justification, et cetera. We’re going to look at those Protestant counters or comebacks, and then learn how to respond to those Protestant comebacks. That’s sort of the format of the book. We’ll look at, for example, confession, what’s the biblical passage we appeal to, how do Protestants respond and how should we counter those counters?
Cy Kellett:
Right. Yeah, so that’s a little bit of what we’re going to do today.
Karlo Broussard:
That’s correct.
Cy Kellett:
So that we’ve let [crosstalk 00:02:30].
Karlo Broussard:
We’re going to give a little, a hint, a little hint.
Cy Kellett:
Sample of what’s coming in.
Karlo Broussard:
The appetite.
Cy Kellett:
It is not named though.
Karlo Broussard:
It’s not named, we’re still working on the name for the book. We’re fixing to start the editorial process and massaging the manuscript and doing all the fun creative stuff. And then we’re hoping to release it of spring 22.
Cy Kellett:
All right. Fixing to start. That’s a…
Karlo Broussard:
And notice I said, “fixing.”
Cy Kellett:
You didn’t say fixing to start.
Karlo Broussard:
I did not say fixing.
Cy Kellett:
No, you’ve really elevated it. That was intentional, man. All right. So sacramental confession.
Karlo Broussard:
Yes.
Cy Kellett:
One of the great gifts that Jesus gave to his church and here’s the situation, it’s much like the other things you’ll address in that book. Catholics will go, there’s a clear airtight passage in the Bible that shows you that Christ instituted the sacrament of confession. And we go, why don’t those Protestants just believe it?
Karlo Broussard:
Amen.
Cy Kellett:
A lot of people say that, but it’s not enough just to say, “It’s airtight, why don’t you believe it?” We got to give more evidence.
Karlo Broussard:
Well, first of all, I think it’s important that we identify what that passage is. That’s John chapter 20 verse 23. And that’s where Jesus tells the apostles on the night of the resurrection in the upper room, he breathes on them, gives them the Holy Spirit and says, “If you forgive the sins of any, they are forgiven. If you retain the sins of any, they are retained.” And so, as you pointed out, many Catholics will say, “Man, it’s clear as day. Why don’t our Protestant friends get it?”
Karlo Broussard:
Well, there are many reasons why our Protestant friends will not buy that argument or ascent to it. One of which is they offer an alternative reading of the text. The idea is that rather than Jesus telling the apostles to actually forgive or not forgive/retain sins, what he is telling them is that they are to go out and preach the forgiveness of sins.
Karlo Broussard:
That’s what Jesus means, so the objection goes. And the idea behind this is what it looks like in reality is that the apostles go out, they proclaim the gospel message. If someone responds to the message and accepts the gospel, then the apostles are to declare for them that God has forgiven their sins.
Cy Kellett:
Yes.
Karlo Broussard:
You see how that’s different than the apostles actually forgiving sins.
Cy Kellett:
Right.
Karlo Broussard:
And or if the apostles preach the gospel and someone rejects it, then the apostles are to declare that God has retained or not forgiven their sins. And so, that’s the objection that our Protestant friends will put forward or at least an alternative reading of the text. And so, of course, that just raises the question, well, what reasons do they give?
Cy Kellett:
Yep. Right. But you will see that if you go to any Protestant apologetic side, if it says, “What’s happening in John 20:23?”
Karlo Broussard:
That’s the reading-
Cy Kellett:
“Here’s what Catholics say, but this is what’s really happening.” And it will… Well, I shouldn’t say always, but the ones that I’ve seen have always said just what you said, it’s the preaching of the gospel that Christ is telling them to do here and that will provide the forgiveness of sins. And then you can just say, your sins are forgiven because you accepted the gospel or they’re not, because you didn’t.
Karlo Broussard:
That’s the interpretation.
Cy Kellett:
They go to Luke’s gospel in order to support this.
Karlo Broussard:
Right. To justify the interpretation. One reason many Protestants give to justify this claim that this is what Jesus means here is looking to Luke chapter 24 verse 47, where they will say, Luke is describing the same event and records Jesus to say, “Go out and preach repentance and the forgiveness of sins.”
Cy Kellett:
Yes.
Karlo Broussard:
And so, operating on the assumption that what John describes in John 20:23 is the same event as what Luke describes in Luke 24:47, then they conclude Luke’s describing for us what Jesus meant in John 20:23.
Cy Kellett:
You would use Luke’s way of telling it as the key for understanding John’s way of telling.
Karlo Broussard:
That’s how it’s often presented. That’s one reason that Protestants give to justify their claim for their reading of John 20:23. Another reason that’s often given is an appeal to the Greek text and now, we’re not going to get too far into the weeds, but I’ll just try to briefly state the objection. And that is whenever Jesus says, if you forgive the sins of any in the first part of the conditional statement and then in the second part, they are forgiven, the perfect tense is used there for are forgiven in this second part of the conditional statement. And the perfect tense in Greek suggest a past action that’s completed and it’s resulting in an ongoing present state of being.
Karlo Broussard:
And so, the argument is given that the present tense is used for are forgiven, are retained, that suggests that God has already forgiven the sins or not forgiven the sins prior to the apostles declaring that sins are forgiven or not forgiven. Like some action sins are already forgiven before the apostles are ever doing anything. And so, they will often conclude a literal translation of the text could be, “If you forgive the sins of any, they are already forgiven. If you retain the sins of any, they are already retained.” And so, this is the second reason that some Protestants will give to justify their alternative reading of John 20:23.
Cy Kellett:
You might say, “Well, Luke gives us the key to understand what John is saying and we can see right there in the syntax of the sentence that that’s what Jesus meant.”
Karlo Broussard:
One argument appeals to Luke, what they think is the parallel version and then the other argument appeals to the perfect tense being used in that second part of the conditional statement when Jesus says, “They are forgiven,” concluding already forgiven. Some action that God performed before the apostles are ever engaging in “forgiving” and “retaining.”
Cy Kellett:
We’re going to kind of dig in to why a Catholic doesn’t find those objections successful. But one thing we probably could say here is that for the Catholic who’s tempted to say, “It’s so dumb, why don’t they just get it?” Well, this is not dumb. These are intelligent arguments.
Karlo Broussard:
It is not. And that’s one of the purposes of my book, Cy, in which some of this material will be found, we’ve just given a little hint here, but that’s one of the purposes of the book is to try to address those Catholics who say, “Wow, it’s so clear, these Protestants must be dumb or something.” No, that’s not the approach we need to be taking. That Protestants actually have reasonable arguments in the face of Catholic arguments, that from their perspective justify them remaining Protestant in the face of the Catholic arguments. Now, ultimately, we’re going to conclude that those Protestant comebacks and those justifications don’t work.
Cy Kellett:
No.
Karlo Broussard:
But at least we cannot say they’re just being close-minded or they’re stupid or dumb or whatever.
Cy Kellett:
No.
Karlo Broussard:
No. They actually do have ways in which they can respond to these Catholic arguments and it’s important that we know that so that we can be respectful and charitable toward or have the right approach to our Protestant brothers and sisters, but also, too, to be able to engage those rebuttals.
Cy Kellett:
The most obvious reading, however, I would say this in our favor, is Jesus gave them the power of forgive sins. He says, whose sins you forgive-
Karlo Broussard:
That’s right. [inaudible 00:10:39] often says, if there’s any passage in the Bible that’s clear, it’s this one.
Cy Kellett:
Right. We’re not saying that their arguments are dumb, but we are saying, “Well, it seems clear and we have reason to continue to believe that despite the arguments you made.” Let’s start with Luke. Why is that not convincing to you that, look, Luke is describing the same event over here and he specifically says “Preach the forgiveness of sins.” That’s what Jesus was talking about.
Karlo Broussard:
And the answer to your question is the assumption that it is the same event is what’s problematic. If we look at Luke, it is true that in verse 1 of Luke 24, he starts off on the day… on the night of the resurrection. He gives us a time cue in verse 1, on the first day of the week. And it’s the resurrection Sunday. And then in verse 13, he gives us another time cue, that same day. Then in verse 33, he gives us another time cue, that same hour. The whole narrative from verse 1 all the way up to basically verse 42 or 43 is all taking place on the same day. And we know that because of the time cues that Luke gives us. But what’s interesting, Cy, is that when we get to verse 44, the time cues drop and Luke begins to use the conjunction “and” writing “and then he said” several different times in rapid fire narration, verse 44, verse 45, then verse 51, 2, 3, 4.
Karlo Broussard:
He’s using “and then he said, and then he said, and then he said.” It seems as if he’s summarizing events or things that Jesus told the apostles that took place at a time that was not on Sunday. He’s sort of collapsing the timeframe and just summarizing things Jesus did and said. And so, given the drop of the time cues and the rapid fire succession of the conjunction “and” seems to suggest that Luke is summarizing a series of instructions that Jesus gave the apostles and events that took place at some time other than resurrection Sunday.
Karlo Broussard:
The question is, what time would that be? Well, Luke gives us insight in Acts chapter 1. First of all, if we look at Luke 24, if we look at 44 through 52, that context right there, there’s a series of instructions that Jesus gives the apostles in which we find the instruction, “Go out and preach the forgiveness of sins.”
Karlo Broussard:
What are the other instructions? “Go out to all nations and preach my name. Preach first in Jerusalem. Wait for the power of the most high to be sent by my father in heaven.” And it’s with these instructions that he says, “Preach the forgiveness of sins.” What’s interesting, Cy, is that in Acts chapter 1 where Luke records again these same instructions that Jesus gives the apostles, the context reveals that Jesus gave these instructions either during the 40 days that Jesus was with his apostles post resurrection prior to Ascension or on the day of Ascension itself. These are instructions Jesus gave the apostles, not on resurrection Sunday, but after, during that time that Jesus is with the apostles prior to his Ascension.
Karlo Broussard:
Whenever we combine all of this data, we arrive at the conclusion that Jesus is giving this instruction to preach the forgiveness of sins at some point in time after resurrection Sunday and not on the same day. And so, therefore, we’re able to critique the Protestant reasoning here and say, “Well, wait a minute, your argument’s only going to work if it’s the same day.”
Cy Kellett:
Right. Otherwise, it’s two different events, Jesus…
Karlo Broussard:
But it’s not the same day. We have good reason to conclude it’s not taking place on the same day, so Luke’s account is not a parallel version of what John’s describing in John 20:23.
Cy Kellett:
John’s describing something different.
Karlo Broussard:
He’s describing something different and therefore, you can’t appeal to what Luke’s recording to shed light on what John’s recording in Jesus’ words in John’s chapter 20 verse 23.
Cy Kellett:
What happens in John 20:23 then? Are there other signs that we might look at and say, “That’s a unique event, this is not like… That Jesus is doing something special here?”
Karlo Broussard:
Yes. There actually are pieces of evidence to suggest that, but I think it’s important that before we get to that evidence, that further evidence of what’s present in John 20:23, I think it’s important that we knock down the other reason that our Protestant friends give to justify their interpretation of John 20:23.
Cy Kellett:
Which was that this is a past perfected action, that Jesus says… He doesn’t say, “Whose ever sins, you forgive, I forgive them at the same time.” He says, “Whose ever sins you forgive are forgiven,” which you might say, “Well, he’s just saying they’ve already been forgiven, you’re just communicating that information to them.”
Karlo Broussard:
That’s the objection.
Cy Kellett:
How do we answer that?
Karlo Broussard:
That’s right. Once again, let’s just summarize the objection. The argument goes because the perfect tense is used in the second part of the conditional statement, it’s referring to some action that took place before the first part of the conditional statement was fulfilled. Our statement is if you forgive sins, they are forgiven. The argument goes, well, are forgiven is perfect tense, so that implies that some action took place before the apostles forgave. But that grammatical principle doesn’t work. For example, in 1 John chapter 2 verse 5, where Saint John records, “Whoever keeps Jesus’ word,” that’s the first part of the conditional statement. “If you keep Jesus’ word, then you are perfected in the love of God.” Now, whenever John says you are perfected in the love of God, the perfect tense is being used.
Cy Kellett:
It’s the same exact tense.
Karlo Broussard:
It’s the same exact tense. And it’s the same structure as John 20:23. Remember, John 20:23 says, “If you forgive sins, they are forgiven.” Perfect tense. 1 John 2:5, “You keep Jesus’ word, you are perfected in the love of God.” Perfect tense is used. Now, if we were to follow the line of reasoning of our Protestant friend subjection here, we would have to say, “Oh, well, I guess God perfected the person before the person ever believed in Jesus’ word.”
Cy Kellett:
Oh, yeah. I see.
Karlo Broussard:
But that’s not the case.
Cy Kellett:
No.
Karlo Broussard:
That’s not the point of what John’s saying or what John’s saying is here, whenever you keep Jesus’ word, that’s when you’re perfected. If that’s the case here in 1 John 2:5, similarly in John 20:23, what Jesus is saying is that your sins will be forgiven. Your sins will be forgiven whenever the apostle forgives. Your sins will not be forgiven whenever the apostle does not forgive.
Cy Kellett:
Right.
Karlo Broussard:
And so, we can appeal to 1 John 2:5 as evidence that this grammatical principle that our Protestant friend is employing here in his objection does not work. Just because the perfect tense is used in the second part of the conditional statement, who are forgiven, doesn’t mean that there’s some action that God performed before the apostles are actually forgiven. Rather, what Jesus is saying is that upon completion of the first part of the conditional statement, when the apostles forgive or retain, the second part of the conditional statement takes place. The sins are forgiven or, in the case the apostles don’t forgive, the sins aren’t forgiven. That’s how we would respond to the second reason that Protestants would give to justify their objection that Jesus means the preaching of the forgiveness of sins.
Cy Kellett:
The Catholic says, “Hey, you got to believe this, because here it is.” And the Protestant says, “Nope, here’s a couple reasons why there’s a different interpretation to that.” But those don’t survive close scrutiny. And so, then maybe the Protestant person or another Catholic would like to know, okay, how am I supposed to read John 20:23?
Karlo Broussard:
That’s a great way to set it up because what that question is asking for is positive reasons to think that we must read it in a sacramental way as opposed to the preaching of the forgiveness of sins. It’s one thing to knock down the reasons that Protestants give to justify their interpretation, but do we have any positive reasons to think that the interpretation is flawed generally speaking, and also that this is the institution of the sacrament of reconciliation.
Karlo Broussard:
First of all, I think the first thing I would say here, Cy, is that there’s no contextual support whatsoever for the idea that Jesus is commissioning the apostles to preach. That’s just not in the text.
Cy Kellett:
It doesn’t say that.
Karlo Broussard:
It doesn’t say that. Nowhere in the immediate context or even if you widen the scope of the context out a little bit, he’s not talking about preaching.
Cy Kellett:
Right, here.
Karlo Broussard:
He’s talking about forgive and retaining sins, which leads to the second response. And that is to say the idea of preaching means something different than the action of forgiving or not forgiving. Those are two different actions to perform.
Cy Kellett:
Exactly.
Karlo Broussard:
I often like to give the example, if I tell my eight-year-old daughter, Catherine, forgive Elijah, my 11-year-old son, forgive him for pushing you or saying something mean to you. I don’t mean Catherine, go up to Elijah and say, “Thus, sayeth the Lord, brother, you need to repent of your own doing. Lest God strike you down.”
Cy Kellett:
No, but she’s awesome if she talks that way.
Karlo Broussard:
That’s right. If she would say that, that would be phenomenal, but that’s not what I mean. I mean, Catherine, don’t hold it against him, you need to let it go. He’s saying he’s sorry. Forgive him. In that sense.
Cy Kellett:
Don’t go preach to him that he can be forgiven, go forgive him.
Karlo Broussard:
Go forgive him, at least, in the ways that we can forgive as human beings. Preaching is essentially different than forgiving. Without any further evidence that we need to read forgiveness in an unnatural way like preach, then we’re justified in reading, forgive sins to me, forgive sins and not preaching.
Karlo Broussard:
Now, a third response is that very quickly notice Jesus says, it’s the apostles who are the ones forgiving and retaining. Jesus doesn’t mention God here. Now granted, we believe that it is ultimately God who forgives sins, but the text does not refer to God as the subject of the action of forgiving and retaining. The text refers to the apostles.
Karlo Broussard:
The Protestant interpretation here is failing to take that into consideration. Now, they might counter and say, “Well, yeah, I agree the apostles are the subject of the action, but the action is the preaching of the forgiveness of sins, not forgiving.” Well, we already dealt with that. But that response is directed to the idea, well, it means God has already done something. Well, no, that’s not what the text is saying, but I think even more profoundly here, Cy, is that this is something new. This is something new in Jesus’ ministry. Consider this, if all Jesus meant here were for the apostles to go out and preach repentance and the forgiveness of sins, then this would not be a new commission. This would not be a new command. Why?
Cy Kellett:
Because he’s already sent them and already preached.
Karlo Broussard:
That’s right. Mark chapter 6, my memory serves me correctly here?
Cy Kellett:
Sends out the 12, then he sends out the 70-
Karlo Broussard:
Go out two by two, you have authority over unclean spirits and he specifically tells him to go out and preach the forgiveness of sins. Jesus already gave them that commission. If that’s all Jesus means here, go out and preach the forgiveness of sins, this would not be a new command, a new instruction.
Cy Kellett:
No, this is a review then. This is just a review of previous work we’ve done.
Karlo Broussard:
That’s right. But this is a new command, this is something new. How do we know that? Well, first of all, Jesus never breathed on the apostles, so that’s something new.
Cy Kellett:
This is very startling. It’s really… It’s striking and weird.
Karlo Broussard:
That’s right. He’s breathing on them. Man, it’s like… If you imagine, that’s like, man, Jesus-
Cy Kellett:
You don’t want to just go past that like nothing happened.
Karlo Broussard:
… I wonder if Jesus had good breath.
Cy Kellett:
He did.
Karlo Broussard:
I’m Sorry.
Cy Kellett:
He’s the risen Lord. He did have good breath.
Karlo Broussard:
No bad breath with Jesus. He breathes on them, that’s something new. That indicates something new is going on here. Secondly, he gives them the Holy Spirit. Jesus had never given the apostles the Holy Spirit yet. This is the first time. The Holy Spirit will come upon them again on the day of Pentecost but this is something new here, giving them the spirit.
Karlo Broussard:
Thirdly, he never tells them to forgive and retain sins. This is new language.
Cy Kellett:
Never has this come up.
Karlo Broussard:
We don’t find that prior to in Jesus’ ministry. Those are three details that are brand spanking new in Jesus’ ministry thus giving us reason to conclude this is a new command and so therefore, we can conclude that Jesus is not telling them to go out and preach the forgiveness of sins. Here’s just to summarize the argument. If preaching the forgiveness of sins, not a new command, but it is a new command, therefore, it’s not the preaching of the forgiveness of sins.
Cy Kellett:
But it is… but we could easily miss that this is something new because we have seen Jesus himself forgiving sins. So we might go, “Oh yeah, this is just part of what Jesus does.” But he never has commissioned anyone else to do it before. There’s something here about… I mean, he certainly goes around forgiving sins.
Karlo Broussard:
Yes he does. And that’s a key point. I’m glad you brought that up, because this provides us more evidence for our understanding that what Jesus is commissioning the apostles to do is to actually forgive and not simply preach the forgiveness of sins, because notice Jesus tells the apostles, “As the Father has sent me, I send you.”
Karlo Broussard:
Well, how did the Father send Jesus? What did the Father send Jesus to do? To preach the forgiveness of sins? Yes. But not just that. The Father also sent Jesus to actually forgive sins and Jesus is telling the apostles, I’m sending you to do the same thing in this ministry of reconciliation. Does it involve the preaching of the forgiveness of sins on behalf of the apostles? Yes. We get that from Luke 24:47. Their ministry did involve the preaching of the forgiveness of sins. But John is revealing to us that their apostolic ministry of reconciling people back to God involved something else, namely the actual forgiving and retaining of sins, which is a revelation of the sacrament of reconciliation.
Cy Kellett:
And it’s really a beautiful image of what Jesus is commissioning people to do, not just to kind of refer to him or make sure people know about him, although that’s extremely important.
Karlo Broussard:
And that’s essentially tied to what they’re doing.
Cy Kellett:
But to do as he does, this is what Jesus has done here. He’s built a church. He’s called them out. And now, he’s commissioning them to do as he has done.
Karlo Broussard:
Just like Jesus, remember Jesus told Pilate, “For this I have been sent into the world to testify to the truth.” He sends the apostles out to do that. He sends us all out to do that.
Cy Kellett:
Sure.
Karlo Broussard:
But I think we have good evidence in the New Testament that he sends the apostles to do that in a very special way to have sort of that doctrinal authority and authority to teach. So, too, in the sense of reconciling people back to God. We all, as baptized Christians and confirmed Catholics, have a calling to reconcile people back to God. We need to go about and convert the sinner. And preach the good news and invite people to communion with Christ, but the apostle have a unique role to play in reconciling people back to God.
Karlo Broussard:
And John 20:23 provides us the answer to the question what is that unique role, namely, to actually forgive sins and to retain sins. Of course, that forgiveness of sins is ultimately coming from God who alone has the power to forgive sins but according to this revelation, Jesus has will to associate his ordained ministers in that ministry of forgiving people’s sins.
Cy Kellett:
This, I think, might be the kind of the last objection though, would be okay, even if I go completely with you, Karlo, okay, I get it. Jesus does something new here. He breathes on them. He gives them a new command. They have the power to forgive sins, but that could apply to all Christians. Maybe he’s giving that power to the whole Church?
Karlo Broussard:
Very good question there or objection, however you present it. A full response, we don’t have time here in our conversation here to give a full response so I would refer our listeners and viewers to an article that I wrote for our Catholic Answers Magazine online. I think the title’s something like not every Joe Schmo, just type in Joe Schmo, it’ll come up, Not Every Joe Schmo Can Forgive Sins. And I gave a detailed response to this objection, giving textual evidence that the disciples mentioned in John 20:23 refers only to the 12. And that gets into the weeds and looking at the text, et cetera, but I can say this generally speaking here, Cy, is that the idea that what’s going on here in John 20:23 applies to all Christians takes effect or has traction if, and only if, what Jesus is telling them is to go out and preach.
Karlo Broussard:
Our Protestant friends are only going to assert that this-
Cy Kellett:
Oh, I see.
Karlo Broussard:
… normally, generally speaking, I think it’s safe to say that our Protestant friends are only going to assert this applies to all Christians because they already believe this is about the preaching of the forgiveness of sins, which makes sense. If that’s all it is, well then yeah, it applies to all of us.
Cy Kellett:
And everybody go out and preach.
Karlo Broussard:
But given what our conversation here today, we’ve given reasons to say it is not the preaching of the forgiveness of sins, rather, it’s sacramental confession. Our argument is if sacramental confession, then it doesn’t apply to all Christians. It is sacramental confession, therefore, it doesn’t apply to all Christians.
Karlo Broussard:
It’s unlikely that our Protestant friends are going to say, “Okay, sacramental confession, but we’re all absolving people of sins.” You might have a few here and there, and that’s when I would refer or to the article, who would say, “Yeah, I have the same power that the priest has to absolve your sins, brother.” There might be a few here and there, but it’s highly unlikely that the majority of Protestants are going to take that view.
Karlo Broussard:
Given that we can prove this is sacramental confession, well, then it follows from that, that it’s not going to apply to all Christians, but apply only to the select few that Jesus is giving the commission to namely the 12, and then of course, by way of extension, we would have to give argument for apostolic succession, that they would transmit that authority to other men who come to possess the same apostolic office that the apostles possessed known as the episcopate, which is the office of the overseer of the bishop.
Cy Kellett:
I don’t know if there’s more that you want to add, but just thinking about all that you’ve said, the consequence of this gift that Jesus gives, this amazing power that he bestows on the apostles is that not just the people living at the moment that Jesus was living-
Karlo Broussard:
Good point.
Cy Kellett:
… can hear the words of forgiveness, but all people for all times can hear the words of forgiveness.
Karlo Broussard:
This is another objection that may be posed by our Protestant friends. It’s possible that a Protestant could say, “Okay, I all can see that Jesus gave the apostles the authority to forgive sins. And perhaps in the first century church, while the apostles were still alive, that’s how people ordinarily received the forgiveness of sins, but given the fact that they all died, that authority no longer is with us so the paradigm has shifted.”
Karlo Broussard:
An initial response to that is, well, that’s a positive claim, which is going to need justification. And given the principle of sola Scriptura, a Protestant who’s working or operating on that principle, they’re going to have to give biblical evidence that Jesus intended or the apostles-
Cy Kellett:
For it to die with the apostles.
Karlo Broussard:
That’s right. Or the apostles taught that the paradigm changed in that we were no longer to receive the forgiveness of sins through the apostolic ministry or their successors, but that’s nowhere to be found in the New Testament. Jesus nor the apostles ever give us that sort of instruction that the paradigm changes. A Protestant who’s operating on the principle of sola Scriptura would not be able to make that argument because there’s no evidence that the paradigm shifted, thus leaving the paradigm given and thus reasonably concluding, well, that must be the paradigm to this day and therefore, looking for the successors to the apostles who have that authority.
Karlo Broussard:
I mean, just intuitively, like you said, why would Jesus set it up that way for the Christians of the first century, but not will that paradigm of receiving the forgiveness of sins in ordinary ways for all Christians. I mean, if Jesus gave that great gift, if he saw it as such a good to give his people in the first century, well then surely, that’s a good-
Cy Kellett:
That he wants to keep communicating.
Karlo Broussard:
That’s right. For all of us of all centuries, for all of his family. And so, those are a couple of initial responses that we could make to this objection. And then of course, we could look at the early Christian testimony and provide positive evidence from the writings of the early church fathers that they actually believed the successors to the apostles, namely the bishops had the authority to forgive sins.
Karlo Broussard:
For example, Saint Hippolytus about AD 215, in one of his writings, when he’s giving instructions on how a man is to be ordained as bishop by a bishop, part of the ritual prayer is invoking Jesus to send down upon the newly ordained bishop the same spirit that he gave as apostles, the spirit of the high priest who has authority to forgive sins. And so, the ritual explicitly states that through the power of the spirit that’s being given to the newly ordained, that the newly ordained bishop has the authority to forgive sins and that’s early third century.
Karlo Broussard:
And we could, of course, provide other evidence, but not only do we have general arguments to show the unreasonableness that the paradigm would change and thus the authority to forgive sins continue for the successors to the apostles, but we actually have positive evidence from the early Christian community that they believed such power was transmitted and continued.
Cy Kellett:
Sounds like we have very good biblical and historical evidence for the establishment by Jesus, himself, of the sacrament of confession.
Karlo Broussard:
Indeed, we do.
Cy Kellett:
All right. Thanks, Karlo.
Karlo Broussard:
Thank you, Cy.
Cy Kellett:
From all of what Karlo said, the part that frankly is most convincing to me is that Jesus behaves in ways here in the 20th chapter of John’s gospel, that he never behaves anywhere else. We see him forgiving sins, but he never instructs people to forgive sins, his apostles to forgive sins other than right here. Where else does he breathe on anyone? Where else does he say, “Receive the Holy Spirit?” This is a unique moment and it’s a unique moment because the sacraments are full of power. The sacrament of confession is full of power and the gospel writer, John and Jesus himself, don’t want us to miss that this is an extraordinary moment, one in which a whole new thing is given into the world, priests with the power, the real power to forgive sins.
Cy Kellett:
Again, I’m Cy Kellett, your host. We’re always glad when you join us. We’re also glad when you send us email. You can send it to focus@catholic.com, focus@catholic.com. If you would like to support us financially, we do need your help to keep doing what we do. Just go to givecatholic.com, givecatholic.com and give in any amount. Just leave a little note that says this is for Catholic Answers Focus. If you’re listening on Apple, Spotify, Stitcher or any other podcast service, don’t forget to subscribe so you’ll be alerted when new episodes become available. And if you’d be willing, please give us that five star review and a few nice words to help us grow the podcast. And those of you who are watching on YouTube, I’d think you know how this works, 131,000 of you are subscribed now, but let’s try to get it up to 200,000. If you’re not subscribed right down here, just like and subscribe. We’ll see you next time, God willing, right here on Catholic Answers Focus.