I’m glad you brought this up. According to the 1987 Karl Keating vs Peter Ruckman debate on Catholicism and Fundamentalism, Dr. Peter Ruckman argued that Jesus did not give that authority only to the Apostles but to all the disciples in John 20:21-23. He went further by saying, that in the same account according to Luke 24:23 the disciples who gathered when Jesus appeared to them were “…the eleven and those with them…”.
Dr. Ruckman managed to escape from Mr.Keating’s response on this because of the debate setting which did not allow any rebuttal. I want to know what would Mr. Keating’s refutation to this argument or what would be yours or how can we refute to this argument in future circumstances?
I’ve given that one some thought, here’s my response (thanks for reading this long post)
Total reconciliation means both forgiveness and absolution. Setting aside, for the moment at least, the issue of forgiveness being imparted by any “follower” of Christ, I’ll stick to the issue of absolution. The power of the Keys was given to Peter and to Peter alone. The authority which priests have to absolve (always remembering that God alone absolves authoritatively, while the priest absolves ministerially) is by way of an extension of the Petrine ministry. Absolution reconciles one to the Church, and here, the priest acts as the Church’s minister as well as God’s minister (a distinction without a difference). One who is outside of the Church cannot act as a minister of the Church*. One who is not himself a part of the visible life of the Church cannot reconcile someone else to the Church (even a priest in a state of most grievous mortal sin can still absolve because he is still the Church’s minister in spite of his own shortcomings, but one who is completely outside of the visible Church cannot reconcile a 3rd party to the Church, excepting the footnote below).
*Even a schismatic priest can still grant the Church’s absolution (in danger of death) because the Church gives him the faculties to do so.
Any person (even a non-Christian) can pray to God an behalf of another and intercede for Him to forgive that person’s sins. In this, Protestants are correct. But only through the ministry of the Church can we be absolved and
know that we have been forgiven.
Let’s use the word “reconciliation” to describe the totality of both forgiveness and absolution. We can be forgiven, by itself, through the infinite mercy of God. When we look at biblical examples, we likewise must look at reconciliation in its totality. There are examples given by Christ of forgiveness (Matt & Lk) and examples of absolution (the Keys). Either one without the other is incomplete, indeed true absolution without forgiveness is impossible. We need to look at the life and words of Christ in their totality, rather than take individual quotes out of context; this is a serious problem with Protestantism as a whole. Christ gave us both forgiveness and absolution, and therefore as true Christians, we must embrace both. We cannot on the one hand accept statements about forgiveness, while likewise rejecting those of absolution (again, the Keys). In order to be totally reconciled to God, we must accept the totality of Christ’s teachings. Forgiveness alone, without absolution by the minister of Christ and His Church, is possible, yet incomplete; specifically because it rejects a part-of-the-whole given by God. We cannot accept what we read in the Gospels of Luke and John while at the same time rejecting what we read in Matthew–unfortunately, this is precisely a fundamental tenet of Protestantism. True Christianity embraces the totality of Christ’s teachings.
