Confession and Penance

The Light Shines in the Darkness...

In the Roman Catholic Church, the sacrament of Penance is the means by which a believer can do good works to make satisfaction and expiation for their sins (i.e. forgive their sins). It is also the means by which a believer who has committed a mortal sin (i.e. lost their salvation) can have the grace of justification restored to them (i.e. regain their salvation):

“Christ instituted the sacrament of Penance for all sinful members of his Church: above all for those who, since Baptism, have fallen into grave sin, and have thus lost their baptismal grace and wounded ecclesial communion. It is to them that the sacrament of Penance offers a new possibility to convert and to recover the grace of justification….It allowed the forgiveness of grave sins and venial sins to be integrated into one sacramental celebration.”

-Catechism of the Catholic Church, 1446-1448

The Catholic Church also claims that its mode of penance (i.e. private confession to a priest, can be done multiple times in one’s lifetime, and is done for all sins, not just mortal ones) was always observed by the Church from the beginning:

“If any one denieth, either that sacramental confession was instituted, or is necessary to salvation, of divine right; or saith, that the manner of confessing secretly to a priest alone, which the Church hath ever observed from the beginning, and doth observe, is alien from the institution and command of Christ, and is a human invention; let him be anathema.”

-Council of Trent, session 14, canon 6

However, as Protestants have been pointing out for centuries, this claim is completely false. First, this article will deal with the claims of the Council of Trent concerning the history of penance, and then, all Scriptures that the Roman Catholic Church uses to support penance will be examined.

Penance and the Early Church

The Anglican Church historian, J.N.D. Kelly, writes (emphasis mine):

“In spite of the ingenious arguments of certain scholars, there are still no signs of a sacrament of private penance (i.e. confession to a priest, followed by absolution and the imposition of a penance) such as Catholic Christendom knows to-day. The system which seems to have existed in the Church at this time, and for centuries afterwards, was wholly public, involving confession, a period of penance and exclusion from communion, and formal absolution and restoration - the whole process being called exomologesis. The last of these was normally bestowed by the bishop, as Hippolytus's prayer of episcopal consecration implies, but in his absence might be delegated to a priest. There is plenty of evidence that sinners were encouraged to open their hearts privately to a priest, but nothing to show that this led up to anything more than ghostly counsel. Indeed, for the lesser sins which even good Christians daily commit and can scarcely avoid, no ecclesiastical censure seems to have been thought necessary; individuals were expected to deal with them themselves by prayer, almsgiving and mutual forgiveness. Public penance was for graver sins; it was, as far as we know, universal, and was an extremely solemn affair, capable of being undergone only once in a lifetime.”

–J.N.D. Kelly, Early Christian Doctrines, rev. ed. (Peabody,MA: Prince Press, reprinted 2003), p.216-217.

Philip Schaff, a Protestant historian, notes (emphasis mine):

“At the close of the twelfth century a complete change was made in the doctrine of penance. The theory of the early Church, elaborated by Tertullian and other Church fathers, was that penance is efficient to remove sins committed after baptism, and that it consisted in certain penitential exercises such as prayer and alms. The first elements added by the mediaeval system were that confession to the priest and absolution by the priest are necessary conditions of pardon. Peter the Lombard did not make the mediation of the priest a requirement, but declared that confession to God was sufficient. In his time, he says, there was no agreement on three aspects of penance: first, whether contrition for sin was not all that was necessary for its remission; second, whether confession to the priest was essential; and third, whether confession to a layman was insufficient. The opinions handed down from the Fathers, he asserts, were diverse, if not antagonistic.”

-Philip Schaff, History of the Christian Church, Vol. V, ch.14, part 117

http://www.ccel.org/s/schaff/history/5_ch14.htm

Even the Catechism of the Catholic Church admits (emphasis mine):

“During the seventh century Irish missionaries, inspired by the Eastern monastic tradition, took to continental Europe the ‘private’ practice of penance, which does not require public and prolonged completion of penitential works before reconciliation with the Church. From that time on, the sacrament has been performed in secret between penitent and priest. This new practice envisioned the possibility of repetition and so opened the way to a regular frequenting of this sacrament. It allowed the forgiveness of grave sins and venial sins to be integrated into one sacramental celebration. In its main lines this is the form of penance that the Church has practiced down to our day.”

-Catechism of the Catholic Church, 1447

When we look at the church fathers, we find that the conclusions of the historians listed above are quite accurate. Augustine describes penance as public and says that it is only done for mortal sins (emphasis mine):

“When ye have been baptized, hold fast a good life in the commandments of God, that ye may guard your Baptism even unto the end. I do not tell you that ye will live here without sin; but they are venial, without which this life is not. For the sake of all sins was Baptism provided; for the sake of light sins, without which we cannot be, was prayer provided. What hath the Prayer? “Forgive us our debts, as we also forgive our debtors.” Once for all we have washing in Baptism, every day we have washing in prayer. Only, do not commit those things for which ye must needs be separated from Christ's body: which be far from you! For those whom ye have seen doing penance, have committed heinous things, either adulteries or some enormous crimes: for these they do penance. Because if theirs had been light sins, to blot out these daily prayer would suffice.”

-Augustine, On the Creed: a Sermon to the Catechumens 15

http://www.ccel.org/fathers2/NPNF1-03/npnf1-03-30.htm#P3502_1656517

Basil of Caesarea said that penance was a very public thing in his day and excluded those doing penance from communion:

“The intentional homicide, who has afterwards repented, will be excommunicated from the sacrament for twenty years. The twenty years will be appointed for him as follows: for four he ought to weep, standing outside the door of the house of prayer, beseeching the faithful as they enter in to offer prayer in his behalf, and confessing his own sin. After four years he will be admitted among the hearers, and during five years will go out with them. During seven years he will go out with the kneelers, praying. During four years he will only stand with the faithful, and will not take part in the oblation. On the completion of this period he will be admitted to participation of the sacrament.”

-Basil of Caesarea, Letters of Basil of Caesarea, Letter 217.56

http://www.ccel.org/fathers2/NPNF2-08/Npnf2-08-235.htm#P5174_1616119

Cyprian stated that confession was to be done in public (emphasis mine):

“For although in smaller sins sinners may do penance for a set time, and according to the rules of discipline come to public confession, and by imposition of the hand of the bishop and clergy receive the right of communion: now with their time still unfulfilled, while persecution is still raging, while the peace of the Church itself is not vet restored, they are admitted to communion, and their name is presented; and while the penitence is not yet performed, confession is not yet made, the hands of the bishop and clergy are not yet laid upon them, the eucharist is given to them; although it is written, ‘Whosoever shall eat the bread and drink the cup of the Lord unworthily, shall be guilty of the body and blood of the Lord.’”

-Cyprian, The Epistles of Cyprian, Epistle 9.2

http://www.ccel.org/fathers2/ANF-05/anf05-34.htm#P4913_1492571

Irenaeus believed the same (emphasis mine):

“For Valentinus came to Rome in the time of Hyginus, flourished under Pius, and remained until Anicetus. Cerdon, too, Marcion’s predecessor, himself arrived in the time of Hyginus, who was the ninth bishop. Coming frequently into the Church, and making public confession, he thus remained, one time teaching in secret, and then again making public confession; but at last, having been denounced for corrupt teaching, he was excommunicated from the assembly of the brethren.”

-Irenaeus, Against Heresies 3.4.3

http://www.ccel.org/fathers2/ANF-01/anf01-60.htm#P7328_1952979

Sozomen notes the public nature of penance as found in Rome at his time (emphasis mine):

“It is observed with great rigor by the Western churches, particularly at Rome, where there is a place appropriated to the reception of penitents, in which spot they stand and mourn until the completion of the services, for it is not lawful for them to take part in the mysteries; then they cast themselves, with groans and lamentations, prostrate on the ground. The bishop conducts the ceremony, sheds tears, and prostrates himself in like manner; and all the people burst into tears, and groan aloud. Afterwards, the bishop rises first from the ground, and raises up the others; he offers up prayer on behalf of the penitents, and then dismisses them. Each of the penitents subjects himself in private to voluntary suffering, either by fastings, by abstaining from the bath or from divers kinds of meats, or by other prescribed means, until a certain period appointed by the bishop. When the time arrives, he is made free from the consequences of his sin, and assembles at the church with the people. The Roman priests have carefully observed this custom from the beginning to the present time.”

-Sozomen, Ecclesiastical History 7.16

http://www.ccel.org/fathers2/NPNF2-02/Npnf2-02-25.htm#P4401_1962273

Ambrose believed that one could not do penance multiple times (emphasis mine):

“Deservedly are they blamed who think that they often do penance, for they are wanton against Christ. For if they went through their penance in truth, they would not think that it could be repeated again; for as there is but one baptism, so there is but one course of penance, so far as the outward practice goes, for we must repent of our daily faults, but this latter has to do with lighter faults, the former with such as are graver.”

-Ambrose, On Repentance 2.10 (part 95)

http://www.ccel.org/fathers2/NPNF2-10/Npnf2-10-33.htm#P6881_1758798

Clement of Alexandria also taught a limitation on repentances of mortal sin (emphasis mine):

“He, then, who has received the forgiveness of sins ought to sin no more. For, in addition to the first and only repentance from sins (this is from the previous sins in the first and heathen life-I mean that in ignorance)…Accordingly, being very merciful, He has vouch-safed, in the case of those who, though in faith, fall into any transgression, a second repentance; so that should any one be tempted after his calling, overcome by force and fraud, he may receive still a repentance not to be repented of…But continual and successive repentings for sins differ nothing from the case of those who have not believed at all, except only in their consciousness that they do sin. And I know not which of the two is worst, whether the case of a man who sins knowingly, or of one who, after having repented of his sins, transgresses again.”

-Clement of Alexandria, The Stromata 2.13

http://www.ccel.org/fathers2/ANF-02/anf02-59.htm#P5822_1770475

The Shepherd of Hermas said the same (emphasis mine):

“For the Lord has sworn by His glory, in regard to His elect, that if any one of them sin after a certain day which has been fixed, he shall not be saved. For the repentance of the righteous has limits. Filled up are the days of repentance to all the saints; but to the heathen, repentance will be possible even to the last day. You will tell, therefore, those who preside over the Church, to direct their ways in righteousness, that they may receive in full the promises with great glory.”

-The Shepherd of Hermas, The Shepherd 1.2.2

http://www.ccel.org/fathers2/ANF-02/anf02-06.htm#P267_36489

It is clear, then, that the claim of the Council of Trent (i.e. an infallible council according to Roman dogma) is clearly and absolutely false.

The Arguments of Roman Catholic Apologists

All Scripture quotes are from the NASB:

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.”

Here, Jesus is talking to His disciples, and He is about to send them out into the world as preachers of the Gospel. Roman Catholic apologists try to use this verse to support priestly absolution (i.e. that a priest can forgive sin). However, as many Bible translations have put in the side margins, the literal reading (and meaning) of verse 23 is: “If you forgive the sins of any, their sins have already been forgiven; if you retain the sins of any, they have not been forgiven.” Thus, this is an authority to declare what has already been decreed in Heaven, namely that God the Father has already declared their sins forgiven. The verse means that Christians can tell others that their sins are forgiven if they believe in the Gospel.

Matthew 16:19

“I will give you the keys to the kingdom of heaven; and whatever you bind on earth shall have been bound in heaven, and whatever you loose on earth shall have been loosed in heaven.”

[Same as John 20:23. Also, see the article on the Scriptural Arguments for the Papacy.]

Matthew 18:18

“Truly I say to you, whatever you bind on earth shall have been bound in heaven; and whatever you loose on earth shall have been loosed in heaven.”

[Same as John 20:23.]

John 17:18

“As You sent Me into the world, I also have sent them into the world.”

It is argued by Roman Catholic apologists that just as Jesus was sent into the world to forgive sins, so Jesus will send the apostles into the world to forgive sin. However, this is highly eisegetical because the forgiveness of sins is not what is in view here. In verses 13-21, Jesus is talking about how He was sent to a fallen world that hated Him and His message, and just as the fallen race of men hated Him and all He stood for, so they will hate His followers, His apostles and other Christians.

John 20:21

“So Jesus said to them again, “Peace be with you; as the Father has sent Me, I also send you.”

[Same as John 17:18.]

James 5:16

“Therefore, confess your sins to one another, and pray for one another so that you may be healed. The effective prayer of a righteous man can accomplish much.”

Roman Catholics appeal to the reference to confession of sins here for the doctrine of confession and penance. However, James is exhorting his readers to confess their sins to each other (layman or pastor), not just to a priest. There is no evidence here of a sacerdotal confession to a priest.

1 John 1:9

“If we confess our sins, He is faithful and righteous to forgive us our sins and to cleanse us from all unrighteousness.”

[Same comments as James 5:16.] John is talking about confession to Christ, not a priest.

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Also, some helpful audio on this topic can be found at:

http://www.straitgate.com/webster/