When Pope Francis granted priests the power to absolve the sin of abortion in September 2015, it triggered a debate on social media.
Protestants pointed at the ridiculous idea of men having the power to forgive people’s sins, while Catholics responded by citing Bible verses from their echo chambers.
The Council of Trent declares that this confession to priest (sacrament of penance) is “necessary unto salvation” and places a curse on those who say otherwise.
In Catholic theology, there are two types of sin – the mortal and venial. A mortal sin is a serious offence against God’s law which kills the grace in the soul and leads to hell.
A venial sin is a less serious sin against God’s law which partially kills grace but can be removed by penance.
However, a sin is mortal when the thought, desire, word, action or omission is seriously wrong, the sinner knows it’s seriously wrong and he/she sinner fully consented to it.
A sin is venial “when the evil done is not seriously wrong; second, when the evil done is seriously wrong but the sinner sincerely believes it is only slightly wrong or does not give full consent to it” (The New Saint Joseph Baltimore Catechism, 32, 33).
When the penitent enters the confessional – a dark booth with a kneeling place and a window – he is to reflect on his sins until the priest (the confessor) slides open the window to listen to him. He must separate out the mortal from the venial sins. To hold back a mortal sin from the priest will send him to hell.
Three things are thus required: the penitent must show contrition for his sins, confess them and do the works of expiation (penance) that the priest levies on him.
But the Bible doesn’t distinguish between “mortal” and “venial” sins, rather it declares that “the wages of sin is death” (Rom. 6:23). Sins are transgressions of God’s law and they are all mortal.
The Bible is replete with examples of people who did not see their sin as “seriously wrong” yet were severely judged by God (Lev. 10:1-2, Num. 12:1-10, 2 Sam. 6:20-23, Acts 5:3-5). In God’s standard, there is no “venial sin.”
Granted, as time changes, what qualifies as mortal sin too changes. Many years ago, eating meat on Friday was a mortal sin, now it’s no more.
Abortion used to a serious sin which qualified a Catholic for excommunication but now, the Pope, with a stroke of his sacerdotal pen, has removed the pain of eternal punishment attached to it.
Nothing more showcases the man-centered system of Catholicism than the fact that priests can even encourage some sins (!):
“If I [a priest] know that someone has made up his mind to commit sin and there is no other way of preventing him, I may lawfully induce him to be satisfied with some less offence of God than he was bent on committing. And so, if a man was determined to commit adultery, I do nothing morally wrong, but rather the contrary, by persuading him to commit fornication instead” (Manual of Moral Theology I:201-202).
When you insist on committing a sin, he bargains with you to commit what he decides is the “lesser sin”. So in most cases, these men “strengthen the hands of evildoers so that no one turns from his wickedness” (Jer. 23:14).
Even with the razzle-dazzle, Catholics don’t confess the sins of idolatry and necromancy because Catholicism endorses them.
Jesus’ denounced such religious leaders who do not enter God’s kingdom and still prevent others from trying to enter (Matt. 23:13).
The Canon law (#989) states that all Catholics above the age of discretion must confess their serious sins at least once a year.
“All mortal sins of which penitents after a diligent self-examination are conscious must be recounted by them in confession, even if they are most secret” (Catechism, 1456).
Now, this is a tool used by most cults: to break down the self-respect of their members by persuading them to share their most innermost secrets. Priests are mandated to resort to different tactics to draw out confessions of secret sins from the penitent:
“It is necessary that the confessor should know everything on which he has to exercise his judgement. Let him then, with wisdom and subtlety, interrogate the sinners on the sins which they may ignore, or conceal through shame” (St. John of Capistrano, The Mirror of the Clergy, 351).
In a case where a lady goes to confess a sexual sin, she must fully recount the act to the priest (who is supposed to be celibate).
He probes her mind with questions to hear all the details. It’s a two-way thing. Through these questions, the lady’s mind is polluted with sexual ideas she might not have imagined before, while the priest’s mind becomes a reservoir for filthy images. Unless he is dead below the belt, he’s titillated by the sexually graphic details he hears.
I wonder how a lady will bring herself to share sexual details she can’t share with her friends with a priest. And even if she does, one imagines the intense shame it brings.
After confession and absolution, the priest gives the penitent “work of satisfaction” for his sins. This could be to recite “Hail Mary” or “Our Father” a given number of times, or to visit the “blessed sacrament”.
The absolution granted doesn’t take effect until when the penance is done. Interestingly, priests trapped in mortal sins can still remove the sins of the laity:
“The Church asks that a priest who absolves a penitent be in the state of grace. This does not mean however that a priest in the state of mortal sin would not possess the power to forgive sins or that when exercised it would not be effective for the penitent” (Bishop Fulton Sheen, Peace of Soul, 1949, 136).
“St” Thomas Aquinas put it more bluntly that “a priest might happen to share in a sin committed by his subject, e.g by [carnal] knowledge of a woman who is his subject … If however, he were to absolve her, it would be valid” (Summa Theologica, 3:4:274-76).
In other words, a confessor may be a rabid fornicator, pedophile, homosexual or indulges in porn, yet he still has ‘the power’ to absolve Catholics of these very sins (sometimes, after his own perverse fantasies have been fuelled by their confessions!)
Little wonder there have been cases of boys sodomised by priests in the confession booth. They went to him to be cleansed from their sins, but ended up more defiled because what the priest himself needs is just a “spark” for his perverted lust to explode.
Auricular confession is mainly based on the belief that “all the bishops and priests of the Catholic Church have the power to forgive sins” – a power they claim was given to them by Jesus (Outlines of the Catholic Faith, 1979, 34). By way of reply:
1. It is God – not man – who blots out sins. “I, even I, am he who blots out your transgressions, for my own sake, and remembers your sins no more” (Isaiah 43:25). He is the One forgives all our iniquities.
It’s irrational to suggest God would stop the power to forgive sin in Himself and restrict it only to a select group of people. If He did that, it would diminish His omnipotence.
2. Some Catholics appeal to the Old Testament, but even Trent affirms that the sacrament of penance is not in the OT.
The OT priests only made atonement on behalf of sins, they neither listened to confessions nor granted absolution.
Ezra the priest said “Now therefore make confession unto the LORD God of your fathers, and do his pleasure…” (Ezra 10:11).
David said: “Then I acknowledged my sin to you and did not cover up my iniquity. I said, ‘I will confess my transgressions to the LORD.’ And you forgave the guilt.” (Psalm 32:5).
Even the Jews listening to Jesus quizzed “who can forgive sins but God?” (Mark 2:7).
3. When the Bible speaks of “the ministry of reconciliation” (2 Cor. 5:18), it’s based on what God has done through Christ on the cross.
A believer is reconciled with God by faith in Christ’s sacrifice not by following the penance prescribed by a religion. Sin, which caused enmity, was dealt with at the cross and the veil of the temple was torn, so there is no need to go through priests to relate with God.
To gain a right standing before God, one must receive the righteousness of Christ by faith in His perfect sacrifice.
“However, when someone, without working, puts faith in the one who justifies the godless, it is this faith that is reckoned as uprightness” (Romans 4:5).
4. Catholics usually lean on some Bible verses for support:
I. John 20:23 “If you forgive the sins of any, their sins have been forgiven them; if you retain the sins of any, they have been retained.” (New American Bible)
Jesus gave all the apostles and disciples power and authority to act in His name. But this was a declaratory power (Mt. 16:18, 18:18). He sent them as the Father sent Him to “to bring the good news to the afflicted” (Lk. 4:18).
They were commanded to proclaim the gospel by which all who believe will receive forgiveness of sin (Matt. 28:18, Mk. 16:15, Lk. 24:44). Jesus was the one saving men from their sins; the apostles were only His emissaries. They were not “little gods” given power to forgive and retain men’s sins.
According to a commentator:
“In this Gospel’s discourse sin is primarily failing to acknowledge the revelation of God in Jesus (cf. 8:24; 9:39-41; 15:22-24). Jesus’ words and works have been depicted as bringing about a judgement which the recipients make on themselves, as they either respond in belief or expose their sinful state of unbelief” (Andrew Lincoln, The Gospel According to St. John, Hendrickson: New York, 2005, 499).
Acts 2:38 “‘You must repent,’ Peter answered, ‘and every one of you must be baptised in the name of Jesus Christ for the forgiveness of your sins, and you will receive the gift of the Holy Spirit” (New Jerusalem Bible).
Acts 10:43 “It is to him that all the prophets bear this witness: that all who believe in Jesus will have their sins forgiven through his name”
Acts 26:18 “to open their eyes, so that they may turn from darkness to light, from the dominion of Satan to God, and receive, through faith in me, forgiveness of their sins and a share in the inheritance of the sanctified”
The forgiveness of sins is received by faith in the Lord Jesus Christ. If the apostles had understood the words of Jesus in John 20:23 to mean listening to confessions and granting absolution as Catholicism practices, there would have been several places in the NT where they did such, but there are none.
Catholics desperately latch on to this verse and refuse to consider its proper context.
II. James 5:16 “So confess your sins to one another, and pray for one another to be cured...” (NAB)
If Catholics must use this verse then as people confess to the priests, the priests must also confess to the people, since the term “one another” is used there. Obviously, the priest-laity distinction is refuted here as with the rest of the NT.
When Simon’s sin was pointed out to him, Peter told him: “Repent of this wickedness of yours, and pray to the Lord that this scheme of yours may be forgiven” (Acts 8:22).
He didn’t take him into a booth to hear his sins and grant absolution, rather he directed him to God who forgives sins.
The Greek word for fault (paraptoma) is different from that of sin (hamartia), though Christians do confess their sins to other believers and get prayed for. But it’s not “necessary for salvation” as Catholicism teaches.
And to say that God will not forgive a person unless he confesses to a priest and does work of expiation is totally false.
III. 2 Cor. 2:10 “But if you forgive anybody, then I too forgive that person; and whatever I have forgiven, if there is anything I have forgiven, I have done it for your sake in Christ’s presence”
The import of this chapter is about forgiveness between brethren and how this is to be handled has been addressed by Scripture (Mt. 5:23-24, 18:15). Nothing here supports confession to priests.
4. As Christians, when we sin, the Bible says we have “we have an advocate with the Father, Jesus Christ, the upright.” (1Jn. 2:1).
We are to confess our sins directly to Christ because He is “faithful and just to forgive us our sins and to cleanse us from all unrighteousness” (1Jn. 1:9).
Why go to a man – pretending to be Christ – when you can go directly to Christ to cleanse you? A Catholic will keep entering the booth as a sinner and leaving it the same because only “the blood of the lamb” can take away his/her sins (Jn. 1:29).
5. The word “penance” doesn’t occur even once in the Bible. What the Bible teaches is repentance and it’s folly for anyone to equate confession with repentance.
A person can confess a sin many times and still not repent from it. When Judas sinned, he confessed his sin to the priests and hanged himself (Mt. 27:4-5). His confession didn’t remove his guilt.
The idea of “doing works of satisfaction” is a denial of the sufficiency of Christ’s work and a rejection of Biblical justification.
Since Jesus is the propitiation (satisfaction) for our sins, there is no amount of “work” prescribed by man that can cleanse us from sin or guilt. Forgiveness of sins is a gift from God, all we have to do is receive it by faith.
The historical development of auricular confession has been examined here.