The Sacrament of Confession: The Fathers on Specific Scriptures...by Matt1618

The Sacrament of Confession:
The Fathers on Specific Scriptures

By Matt1618

Introduction
John 20:23
Matthew 18:18
James 5:14-16
Acts 19:18
2 Cor. 2:10
Conclusion


Introduction

I have written a paper on the Scriptural basis for confession. That is available here: http://matt1618.freeyellow.com/confess.html. Now there are many Scriptural passages involved which would give a basis for the sacrament of confession, but there are some central ones that are important as far as giving the Catholic Scriptural basis for it. Opponents of Catholicism will say that Catholics are reading into these passages Catholic bias, and that they do not teach anything like the need for Christians to confess sins to priests. We just need to confess only to God, they will argue. In this paper, I will focus on specific important passages, and see how they were interpreted by the Fathers in relation to the sacrament of confession. I will not give all quotes. For example, in relation to John 20, some Fathers will specifically mention the procession of the Holy Spirit, as relates to the Son, or some other issue, that does not deal with the sacrament, one way or another, usually in passing. I will not give those quotes. I will not give all the quotes of Fathers who say that there is confession, as those are numerous and done elsewhere. Here are some sample urls that deal with the Fathers on the existence of the sacrament of confession that forgives sins: http://www.catholic.com/library/Confession.asp and http://www.cin.org/users/jgallegos/confess.htm . But I will go by specific Scriptures, and put the Fathers’ comments on those passages. There are many quotes from Fathers which show that confession is the way that sins are forgiven, but they either don‘t quote a specific Scripture that is normally used by Catholics, quote other Scriptures, or just show a reliance on tradition. Many will mention the rite of confession as a given. I will not refer to those quotes here unless they specifically quote the verses involved. In this study, I will only use the ones that refer to these specific passages: John 20:23, Mt. 18:18, James 5:14-16, Acts 19, and 2 Cor. 2:10. The most central ones are John 20:23 and Matthew 18:18, as they are most referred to by Catholics in support of the sacrament. John 20 is especially central to the Catholic claim because that is where we say Jesus actually gave the commission for the sacrament of confession.

Some of the citations for the Fathers that I found come from the 38 volume series: Philip Schaff and Henry Wace, Nicene and Post Nicene Fathers, Hendrickson Publishers, Inc., Peabody, Massachusetts, 1995. This 38 volume series is divided into three sections: There are 10 volumes of: Anti-Nicene Fathers; 14 volumes of the Nicene and Post-Nicene Fathers, first Series ; and 14 volumes of Nicene and Post-Nicene Fathers, second Series. I have the books at home, but the full series is actually found online here. http://www.ccel.org/fathers2 Each of the Fathers cited, who have quotes from the NPNF, or ANF Schaff citations can be found online through that series with the volume cited. (Except for Vol. 10 of the Anti-Nicene Series, which is the index of the first 9 volumes). Those Books, will be referred to as ANF, for Anti Nicene Fathers and NPNF1 or NPNF2, for the Nicene and Post Nicene Fathers, Series 1 or 2. The book series can be purchased here: Christian Book Distributors. Another source I use here is: William Jurgens, The Faith of the Early Fathers, vol. 1-3, Liturgical Press, Collegeville, Minnesota, 1978. This is not to say that what I give is all that that the Fathers spoke on these verses as they relate to confession. This is what I could find, using the indexes that were available. Some quotes explicitly link the verses (such as John 20:23, with Mt. 18:18), and may be repeated. The brown quotation is the quotation of the Father, red is the color of the Scriptural quote, and my comments follow the quotation.


John 20:23

Firmilian of Caesarea  Letter to Cyprian, [75, 16] (255/256 AD)

But what is his error, and how great his blindness, who says that the remission of sins can be given in the synagogues of the heretics, and who does not remain on the foundation of the one Church which was founded upon the rock by Christ, can be learned from this, which Christ said to Peter alone: “Whatever things you shall bind on earth shall be bound also in in heaven, they shall be loosed in heaven; and by this again in the gospel, when Christ breathed upon the Apostles alone, saying to them: “Receive the Holy Spirit: if you forgive any man his sins they shall be forgiven; and if you retain any man’s sins, they shall be retained.” Therefore, the power of forgiving sins was given to the Apostles and to the Churches which these men, sent by Christ, established; and to the bishops who succeeded them by being ordained in their place. William Jurgens, The Faith of the Early Fathers, vol. 1, Liturgical Press, Collegeville, Minnesota, 1978, #602, p. 245. Here we see Firmilian writing to fellow bishop St. Cyprian of Carthage. He takes for granted that John 20:22-23, which says ‘receive the Holy Spirit, if you forgive the sins of any they shall be forgiven..’ refers to confession. He takes for a given the power of forgiving sins was given to the apostles alone. Protestant apologists such as Norm Geisler and Ron Rhodes argue that this passage only speaks to proclaiming the gospel, and this passage speaks to all believers that if people accept the gospel, they will be forgiven, and if they do not accept the gospel, they will not be forgiven. However, Firmilian rightly notes the Catholic view that Jesus spoke this only to the apostles. And this passage teaches that not only the apostles but their successors have the authority to forgive sins. Now, here Firmilian does insinuate that Pope Steven, who affirmed the Catholic position that those outside the Catholic Church are validly baptized, also would accept that confession outside of apostolic succession would be valid, as well. He argues that it is an inevitable consequence of his view on baptism. However, there is no evidence that Pope Steven would accept that. Pope Steven held the position that would be accepted by the Catholic Church throughout the ages, that although baptisms can be valid outside the Church, confession would only be valid with apostolic succession found in the Catholic Church. But, for our purposes here, we see Firmilian take as a given that John 20:23 teaches that the apostles were given the authority to forgive sins in confession, and that successors of the bishops validly forgive sins.

    St. Ambrose, Concerning Repentance, Book 1, 2:6-8 (384 AD):

  6. They affirm that they are showing great reverence for God, to Whom alone they reserve the power of forgiving sins. But in truth none do Him greater injury than they who choose to prune His commandments and reject the office entrusted to them. For inasmuch as the Lord Jesus Himself said in the Gospel: "Receive ye the Holy Spirit whosesoever sins ye forgive they are forgiven unto them, and whosesoever sins ye retain, they are retained," Who is it that honours Him most, he who obeys His bidding or he who rejects it?

7. The Church holds fast its obedience on either side, by both retaining and remitting sin; heresy is on the one side cruel, and on the other disobedient; wishes to bind what it will not loosen, and will not loosen what it has bound, whereby it condemns itself by its. own sentence. For the Lord willed that the power of binding and of loosing should be alike, and sanctioned each by a similar condition. So he who has not the power to loose has not the power to bind. For as, according to the Lord's word, he who has the power to bind has also the power to loose, their teaching destroys itself, inasmuch as they who deny that they have the power of loosing ought also to deny that of binding. For how can the one be allowed and the other disallowed? It is plain and evident that either each is allowed or each is disallowed in the case of those to whom each has been given. Each is allowed to the Church, neither to heresy, for this power has been entrusted to priests alone. Rightly, therefore, does the Church claim it, which has true priests; heresy, which has not the priests of God, cannot claim it. And by not claiming this power heresy pronounces its own sentence, that not possessing priests it cannot claim priestly power. And so in their shameless obstinacy a shamefaced acknowledgment meets our view.

8. Consider, too, the point that he who has received the Holy Ghost has also received the power of forgiving and of retaining sin. For thus it is written: "Receive the Holy Spirit: whosesoever sins ye forgive, they are forgiven unto them, and whosesoever sins ye retain, they are retained." So, then, he who has not received power to forgive sins has not received the Holy Spirit. The office of the priest is a gift of the Holy Spirit, and His right it is specially to forgive and to retain sins. How, then, can they claim His gift who distrust His power and His right? NPNF2, vol. 10, p. 330.

Here St. Ambrose shows that the priest is a successor to the apostles with the authority to forgive sins. He quotes John 20:23 twice to prove that only those priests within the Catholic Church have the authority to forgiven sins. Heretics do not have the authority or office to give that forgiveness. It is obvious that even the heretics tried to practice confession, but they just didn’t have authority to do so. The Catholic Church only has ‘true priests’, according to St. Ambrose.

  St. John Chrysostom, On the Priesthood, Book 3, 5 (386 AD):  

For indeed what is it but all manner of heavenly authority which He has given them when He says, "Whose sins ye remit they are remitted, and whose sins ye retain they are retained?" What authority could be greater than this?” "The Father hath committed all judgment to the Son?" But I see it all put into the hands of these men by the Son. For they have been conducted to this dignity as if they were already translated to Heaven, and had transcended human nature, and were released from the passions to which we are liable. Moreover, if a king should bestow this honor upon any of his subjects, authorizing him to cast into prison whom he pleased and to release them again, he becomes an object of envy and respect to all men; but he who has received from God an authority as much greater as heaven is more precious than earth, and souls more precious than bodies, seems to some to have received so small an honor that they are actually able to imagine that one of those who have been entrusted with these things will despise the gift. NPNF1, vol. 9, p. 47

St. Chrysostom expresses awe in this letter on the priesthood, that they have such amazing authority to forgive sins. The Son is the Judge of all, but Jesus amazingly gives this authority to forgive sins to the apostles (and their successors). He authorizes them to forgive or retain sins.

St. John Chrysostom, Homilies on Second Corinthians, Homily 6, (386 AD):

  For, that prophets wrought, but this they could not: for none can remit sins but God only; nor did the prophets bestow that life without the Spirit. But this is not the marvel only, that it giveth life, but that it enabled others also to do this. For He saith, "Receive ye the Holy Ghost." (John chapter 20, verse 22) Wherefore? Because without the Spirit it might not be? [Yes,] but God, as showing that It is of supreme authority, and of that Kingly Essence, and hath the same power [with Himself,] saith this too. Whence also He adds, "Whosesoever sins ye remit, they are remitted; and whosesoever sins ye retain, they are retained." NPNF1, vol. 12, p. 307.
St. Chrysostom mentions that God is King. Even the Old Testament prophets did not have the authority to forgive sins as New Testament priests do. God gave this power through Jesus in John 20:22-23. The priests have the same power, as King Jesus delegated that supreme authority to the apostles. This gift is given through the Holy Spirit.

St. John Chrysostom, On the Gospel of John , Homily 86, 4 (391 AD):  

Let us then do all we can to have the Holy Spirit with ourselves, and let us treat with much honor those into whose hands its operation hath been committed. For great is the dignity of the priests.   "Whosesoever sins," it saith,   "ye remit, they are remitted unto them"; wherefore also Paul saith, "Obey them that have the rule over you, and submit yourselves." (Heb. xiii. 17.) And hold them very exceedingly in honor; for thou indeed carest about thine own affairs, and if thou orderest them well, thou givest" no account for others, but the priest even if he rightly order his own life, if he have not an anxious care for thine, yea and that of all those around him, will depart with the wicked into hell. NPNF1, vol. 14, p. 326.
St. Chrysostoms mentions again here the great dignity of priests. Priests are to be obeyed.. Priests have such authority, that they have authority over our own souls. If they do not fulfill their duties properly St. Chrysostom warns that they can even lose their own salvation. Our own eternity is put into their hands, as the priests are Christ’s instruments.

St. Augustine, On Baptism, Against the Donatists, Book 5, chap. 21, (400 AD):

  Wherefore God gives the sacrament of grace even through the hands of wicked men, but the grace itself only by Himself or through His saints. And therefore He gives remission of sins either of Himself, or through the members of that dove to whom He says, "Whosesoever sins ye remit, they are remitted; and whosesoever sins ye retain, they are retained." NPNF1, vol. 4, p. 474.
Donatists were heretics who argued that immoral priests could not forgive sins, or do the duties of priests. St. Augustine notes here that this is incorrect. He notes that even immoral priests, called ‘Bad’ do have that authority. If the priests are truly successors to the apostles, even if they have moral problems, Christians can be assured that their sins are truly forgiven. That is because even through the immoral priest, Jesus himself gives that grace of forgiveness.

St. Augustine, On Baptism, Against the Donatists, Book 1, chap. 11, 15 & ch. 12, 18, (400 AD):

  He then went on to say, "Baptize all nations in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost."Whose soever sins ye remit, they are remitted unto them; and whose soever sins ye retain, they are retained." And if it is so, they say, then our communion is the Church of Christ; for the Holy Spirit does not work the remission of sins except in the Church. And if our communion is the Church of Christ, then your communion is not the Church of Christ. For that is one, wherever it is, of which it is said, "My dove is but one; she is the only one of her mother;" nor can there be just so many churches as there are schisms...

..so let them understand that men may be baptized in communions severed from the Church, in which Christ's baptism is given and received in the said celebration of the sacrament, but that it will only then be of avail for the remission of sins, when the recipient, being reconciled to the unity of the Church, is purged from the sacrilege of deceit, by which his sins were retained, and their remission prevented. For, as in the case of him who had approached the sacrament in deceit there is no second baptism, but he is purged by faithful discipline and truthful confession, which he could not be without baptism, so that what was given before becomes then powerful to work his salvation, when the former deceit is done away by the truthful confession; so also in the case of the man who, while an enemy to the peace and love of Christ, received in any heresy or schism the baptism of Christ, which the schismatics in question had not lost from among them, though by his sacrilege his sins were not remitted, yet, when he corrects his error, and comes over to the communion and unity of the Church, he ought not to be again baptized: because by his very reconciliation to the peace of the Church he receives this benefit, that the sacrament now begins in unity to be of avail for the remission of his sins, which could not so avail him as received in schism. NPNF1, vol. 4, p. 474.

Here, in the first paragraph St. Augustine first puts his opponents words into action (in other words, the first paragraph is not his argument), where they argue that through John 20:23 that confession is valid in a non-Catholic Church. His opponents argue that if you hold that Donatists give valid baptisms, then you must hold that their confessions are valid as well. This is the same argument that Firmilian used. Now in the second paragraph above (part of his response to the first paragraph), St. Augustine says that even though their baptisms are valid, in order for them to get remission of sins, it is not necessary for those who had been in schism to get rebaptized. All they need to do is go to a valid priest to get a valid confession, where they repent from their heresy and schism. Thus, he disposes of the Firmilian argument that sympathized with St. Cyprian’s argument against Pope Steven. More to the point, however, is that even though there is a disagreement between Firmilian and St. Augustine on whether they are to rebaptize, they all take as a given that John 20:23 does prove that the sacrament of confession was established by Christ.

 St. Augustine, On the Gospel of John, Tractate CXXI, 7, (416 AD):

  "As the Father hath sent me," He adds, "even so send I you." We know the Son to be equal to the Father; but here we recognize the words of the Mediator. For He exhibits Himself as occupying a middle position when He says, He me, and I you. "And when He had said this, He breathed on them, and said unto them, Receive ye the Holy Ghost." By breathing on them He signified that the Holy Spirit was the Spirit, not of the Father alone, but likewise His own. ""Whose so-ever sins," He continues, "ye remit, they are remitted unto them; and whose soever ye retain, they are retained."The Church's love, which is shed abroad in our hearts by the Holy Spirit, discharges the sins of all who are partakers with itself, but retains the sins of those who have no participation therein. Therefore it is, that after saying "Receive ye the Holy Ghost," He straightway added this regarding the remission and retention of sins. NPNF1, vol. 7, p. 438.
St. Augustine verifies again that those within the Church’s bosom get their sins forgiven through the priests. The Holy Spirit works, again through the church. The remission and retention of sins is given through the Church.

Matthew 18:18

Firmilian of Caesarea  Letter to Cyprian, [75, 16] (255/256 AD)

But what is his error, and how great his blindness, who says that the remission of sins can be given in the synagogues of the heretics, and who does not remain on the foundation of the one Church which was founded upon the rock by Christ, can be learned from this, which Christ said to Peter alone: “Whatever things you shall bind on earth shall be bound also in in heaven, they shall be loosed in heaven; and by this again in the gospel, when Christ breathed upon the Apostles alone, saying to them: “Receive the Holy Spirit: if you forgive any man his sins they shall be forgiven; and if you retain any man’s sins, they shall be retained.” Therefore, the power of forgiving sins was given to the Apostles and to the Churches which these men, sent by Christ, established; and to the bishops who succeeded them by being ordained in their place. Jurgens, vol. 1, #602, p. 245. This is the same quotation as above. Here he uses Matthew 18:18 in communion with John 20;23 as proof of the sacrament. Matthew 18 is another important verse that reflects confession. There is no Protestant interpretation of this passage by the Fathers. Only the successors of the apostles have the authority to forgive sins.

St. Hilary of Poitiers, Commentary on the Gospel of Matthew [on Matthew 18:18] [4,22], (353-355 AD)

The power of binding and loosing given to the Apostles; - In our present condition we are all subdued by the terror of that greatest dread. And now, out in front of that terror, He sets the irrevocable apostolic judgment, however severe, so that those whom they shall bind on earth, that is, whomsoever they leave bound in the knots of their sins; and those whom they loose, which is to say, those who by their confession receive grace unto salvation: - these in accord with the apostolic sentence, are bound or loosed also in heaven. Jurgens, vol. 1, #855a, pp. 372-373.
Here St. Hilary notes that Matthew 18:18 only applies to the apostles. The Protestant take on this verse is usually that here this was not limited to the apostles, but to all believers, and has nothing to do with a sacrament of confession. Here St. Hilary rightly advises that this binding and loosing is only limited to the apostles (and their successors). This is an irrevocable judgment. He uses the language in present tense. So this irrevocable power is given to the priests of his time. The dread of departing into hell is alleviated by the fact that no matter the sins, they can receive grace unto salvation when they confess their sins. No matter how horrible their sins are, they can confess those sins and have them loosed.

St. Pacian of Barcelona, Three Letters to the Novatianist Sympronian, [1, 6] (375-392AD)  

Certainly God never threatens the repentant; rather, He pardons the penitent. You will say that it is God alone who can do this. True enough; but it is likewise true that He does it through His priests, who exercise His power. What else can it mean when He says to His Apostles: "Whatsoever ye shall bind on earth shall be bound in Heaven, and whatsoever ye shall loose on earth shall be loosed in Heaven." Why should he say this if He were not permitting men to bind and to loose? Why if He were permitting this to the Apostles alone? Were that the case, Hew would likewise be permitting them alone to baptize, then alone to Confer the Holy Spirit, them alone to cleanse the pagans of their sins; for all of these things are commissioned not to others but to the Apostles. But if the loosing of bonds and the power of the Sacrament is given to anyone in that place, either the whole is passed on to us from the form and power of the Apostles, or nothing of it can be imparted to us by whatever decrees, Jurgens, vol. 2, #1244, p. 142.
St. Pacian here refutes the Protestant argument that ‘Only God can forgive sins.’ He notes the power of binding and loosing sins was given to the apostles. He argues ‘what else’ can it mean? He approaches it as though it is foolish to think that any other interpretation can be given except that Jesus gave to the apostles only the authority to forgive sins in confession. And he argues that it is likewise foolish to argue that the Sacrament of confession is not available for believers now, just as baptisms are now available.

St. Jerome, Commentary on Matthew, [3:16,19], (398 AD)  

Just as in the Old Testament the priest makes the leper clean or unclean, so in the New Testament the bishop and presbyter binds or looses not those who are innocent or guilty, but by reason of their office, when they have heard various kinds of sins, they know who is to be bound and who loosed. Jurgens, vol. 2, p. 202
Although St. Jerome is not specifically quoting the whole passage, it is clear that he is referring to Mt. 18:18, when he says that the bishops and presbyters hear confessions, and they make the declaration of whether ones sins are bound are loosed. This commission to bind or loose sins is still currently given to the New covenant bishops and presbyters (priests).

St. John Chrysostom, On the Priesthood, Book 3, 5, (386 AD):  

For if any one will consider how great a thing it is for one, being a man, and compassed with flesh and blood, to be enabled to draw nigh to that blessed and pure nature, he will then clearly see what great honor the grace of the Spirit has vouchsafed to priests; since by their agency these rites are celebrated, and others nowise inferior to these both in respect of our dignity and our salvation. For they who inhabit the earth and make their abode there are entrusted with the administration of things which are in Heaven, and have received an authority which God has not given to angels or archangels. For it has not been said to them, "Whatsoever ye shall bind on earth shall be bound in Heaven, and whatsoever ye shall loose on earth shall be loosed in Heaven." They who rule on earth have indeed authority to bind, but only the body: whereas this binding lays hold of the soul and penetrates the heavens; and what priests do here below God ratifies above, and the Master confirms the sentence of his servants. NPNF1, vol. 9, p. 47.
Here St. Chrysostom notes that the authority that priests are even greater than the authority given to angels and even archangels. He again refers to Mt. 18:18 for the proof of this authority. What they loose on earth (the forgiveness of sins) makes it possible to enter heaven. Earthly authority given to secular rulers pale in comparison to the power that priests have, of binding and loosing sins.

St. John Chrysostom, On the Epistle to the Hebrews, Homily 4, 8 (403 AD):  

If however any man disregard the bonds which we inflict, again let Christ instruct him, saying, "Whatsoever ye shall bind on earth shall be bound in heaven; and whatsoever ye shall loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven." (Matt. xviii. 18) . For though we ourselves be miserable and good for nothing and worthy to be despised, as indeed we are; yet are we not avenging ourselves nor warding off anger, but are caring for your salvation... Forgive me then, and let no man disregard the bonds of the Church. For it is not man who binds, but Christ who has given unto us this authority, and makes men lords of this so great dignity. For we indeed wish to use this power for loosing; or rather, we wish to have no need even of that, for we wish that there should not be any bound among us-we are not so miserable and wretched [as that] even though some of us are extreme good-for-nothings. NPNF1, vol. 14, p. 387.
St. Chrysostom says that even if the priest is ‘good for nothing’, unholy per se, the priest has the power to bind and loose the sins of believers in Christ. Here, he affirms the anti-Donatist doctrine that the remission of sins, is not dependent on the holiness of the priest. They have power over the believers own souls. Let no man disregard the bonds of the Church, according to the Saint. The saint also refutes the Protestant take on the sacrament. Protestants say that the power priests have is not from God, but man. He argues that it is not mine, but it is ‘Christ who has given unto us’ that power for binding and loosing sins.

St. Augustine, On the Gospel of John, Tractate XXII, 7, (416 AD):

  For thou wast lying dead in thy heart as in a tomb, and pressed down by the weight of evil habit as by a stone. Rise, and go forth. What is Rise, and go forth? Believe and confess. For he that has believed has risen; he that confesses is gone forth. Why said we that he who confesses is gone forth? Because he was hid before confessing; but when he does confess, he goes forth from darkness to light. And after he has confessed, what is said to the servants? What was said beside the corpse of Lazarus? "Loose him, and let him go." How? As it was said to His servants the apostles, "What things ye shall loose on earth, shall be loosed in heaven." NPNF1, vol. 7, p. 147.
When one is dead spiritually as Lazarus was physically, there is one remedy for that: If we believe and confess our sins to the priest, we go from darkness to light!!!  
 

James 5:14-16

Now, here I only give a few passages from Fathers that specifically relate this passage to confession. Now, many Fathers did use this this passage in the context of the sacrament of the anointing of the sick. Here they speak of the forgiveness of sins, through the anointing of the sick, which Catholics have in the past termed ‘extreme unction’. That is where most of the focus is for most Fathers, especially verses 14 and 15. This shows the power of the priesthood. Since I am limiting my discussion to the Sacrament of confession I am not referring to the passage as it relates to the anointing of the sick, but that can be found here: http://www.cin.org/users/jgallegos/anoint.htm This includes: Serapion of Thmuis, Hippolytus, St. Ambrose, Cyril of Alexandria, Pope Innocent, Ceasar of Arles, and Cassiodorus. Regardless, the Fathers affirm that this passage teaches the sacrament. Here, we also have a couple of Fathers seeing in this passage a reference to the sacrament of confession:

Origen, Homilies on Leviticus, Hom. 2, 4 (244 AD):

In addition to these there is also a seventh, albeit hard and laborious: the remission of sins through penance, when the sinner washes his pillow in tears, when his tears are day and night his nourishment, when he does not shrink from declaring his sin to a priest of the Lord and from seeking medicine, and after the manner of him who says, “I said, ‘To the Lord I will accuse myself of my iniquity, and you forgave the disloyalty of my heart.” In this way there is fulfilled that too, which the Apostle James says:   “If, then, there is anyone sick, let him call the presbyters of the Church, and let them impose hands upon him, anointing him with oil in the name of the Lord; and the prayer of faith will save the sick man, and if he be in sins, they shall be forgiven him. Jurgens, Vol. 1, #493, p. 207.
Here we see Origen refer to both sacraments, confession and the anointing of the sick. The remission of sins is given through penance, and when he declares his sin to a priest of God. For proof of that he goes to James 5. Thus, that is the sacrament of confession. Confession is so central, that when he quotes Psalm 32:5, where he says ‘To the Lord I accuse myself’,” He applies it specifically to confession. Origen reflects the Catholic belief, that when we confess our sins to the priest, we are confessing directly to God.

St. John Chrysostom, On the Priesthood, Book 3, (386 AD):  

For I return once more to the point from which I started: not in the way of chastising only, but also in the way of benefiting, God has bestowed a power on priests greater than that of our natural parents. The two indeed differ as much as the present and the future life. For our natural parents generate us unto this life only, but the others unto that which is to come. And the former would not be able to avert death from their offspring, or to repel the assaults of disease; but these others have often saved a sick soul, or one which was on the point of perishing, procuring for some a milder chastisement, and preventing others from falling altogether, not only by instruction and admonition, but also by the assistance wrought through prayers. For not only at the time of regeneration, but afterwards also, they have authority to forgive sins. "Is any sick among you?" it is said, "let him call for the elders of the Church and let them pray over him, anointing him with oil in the name of the Lord. And the prayer of faith shall save the sick, and the Lord will raise him up: and if he have committed sins they shall be forgiven him." Again: our natural parents, should their children come into conflict with any men of high rank and great power in the world, are unable to profit them: but priests have reconciled, not rulers and kings, but God Himself when His wrath has often been provoked against them. NPNF1, vol. 9, p. 48.
 Here St. Chrysostom specifically first speaks to the remission of sins given at baptism (time of regeneration). Immediately after this, if sins are committed, St. Chrysostom speaks of getting sins forgiven through the priests. As proof of this, he then refers James 5:14-15. Yes, he is speaking of the anointing of the sick, but he definitely also is speaking of the sacrament of confession as he is not referring only to the time that one is sick. Priests have reconciled the people to God himself when God’s wrath would come. The sacrament of confession is confirmed through James 5.


Acts 19:18

St. Basil the Great, Rules Briefly Treated, 288:  

It is necessary to confess our sins to those to whom the dispensation of God’s mysteries is entrusted. Those doing penance of old are found to have done it before the saints. It is written in the Gospel that they confessed their sins to John the Baptist (Mk. 1:6); but in Acts they confessed to the Apostles (Acts 19:18), by whom also all were baptized. Jurgens, vol. 2, #977, p. 26.
St. Basil refers to Acts 19:18. Even though he doesn’t directly quote the passage, St. Basil does refer to the following passage which shows confession:   
Many also of those who were now believers came, confessing and divulging their practices.
St. Basil sees this passage as referring to the apostles as those the believers confessed their sins to. Acts 19 shows, according to St. Basil the Great, that we must confess our sins to those priests who are dispensers of God ‘mysteries.’ He also refers to the precedent of people confessing their sins to John the Baptist in Mk. 1:6 as precedent for the new covenant sacrament.      

2 Cor. 2:10

St. Ambrose, Concerning Repentance, Book 2, V:64 (384 AD):  

The house of Corinth stank, when it was written concerning it: "It is reported that there is fornication among you, and such fornication as is not even among the Gentiles." There was a stench, for a little leaven had corrupted the whole lump. A good odour began when it was said: “If ye forgive anything to any one I forgive also. For what I also have forgiven, for your sakes have I done it in the person of Christ." "And so, the sinner being set free, there was great joy in that place, and the whole house was filled with the odour of the sweetness of grace. Wherefore the Apostle, knowing well that he had shed upon all the ointment of apostolic forgiveness, says: "We are a sweet savour of Christ unto God in them that are saved." NPNF2, Vol. 10, p. 353.
We see here that St. Ambrose sees 2 Cor. 2:10, giving the Catholic interpretation of it. He sees 2 Cor. 2:10 as showing that Paul gave forgiveness of sins to the 1 Cor. 5 believer who had committed sin with his own mother. Paul gave apostolic forgiveness to the person. in the person of Christ. This apostolic forgiveness set the sinner free.

Conclusion

The main passages that are used by Catholics are John 20:23 and Matthew 18:18. The Fathers, being Catholic, reflect that belief that those Scriptures teach confession. John 20:23 teaches that Jesus gave the power to forgive or retain sins to the apostles. The Fathers do not see it merely proclaiming the gospel and whoever believes automatically gets their sins forgiven, and whoever does not believe gets their sins retained. That is the general Protestant take on John 20:23. The Fathers, being Catholic present the Catholic take on the verse: Here Jesus establishes the sacrament of confession. The Fathers, also agree that this sacrament has been passed on throughout the ages, and those successors to the apostles, also have that power to forgive or retain sins. Matthew 18:18, as seen by numerous Fathers, also reflects the authority of both the apostles, and their successors to bind or loose sins. That is what is done in the sacrament of confession. In these passages, it is taken as a given that the sacrament of confession exists. Even heretics tried, but did not have the authority to forgive or retain sins. Also, other passages that are often used by Catholics to show this power, James, 5, Acts 19, and 2 Cor. 2, also reflect precedent in the Catholic take on the verses. Those passages reflect that the sacrament ordained by Jesus in John, is reflected not only in Matthew, but in Acts and New Testament epistles. This shows that the Catholic use of these verses in teaching the sacrament of confession is reflected in the early church.


To all visitors Grace of Christ to you!

Page created by: Matt1618. Send email with questions on this article to Matt matt16182@yahoo.com



RETURN

Return to Confession Page


RETURN

Return to Matt's Catholic Apologetics Page

  © The Sacrament of Confession: The Fathers on Specific Scriptures...by Matt1618. This text may be downloaded or printed out for private reading, but it may not be uploaded to another Internet site or published, electronically or otherwise, without express written permission from the author.

Last modified April 11, 2004