John 20:23 - Retaining Sins

[Dispector]

Hey everybody,

I am having a discussion regarding Catholic teachings and doctrines with a friend of mine. He’s starting to have an interest in Catholicism and I’ve been showing him how Catholicism is rooted in the Bible.

However, one of the verses that came up that I was not able to fully explain was 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.”

He was wondering in what conditions the Church may “retain sins” and how often this occurs. I was unable to answer this and told him I would do some research and get back to him. I was hoping someone could provide me a Catholic interpretation and an explanation for my question.

I appreciate all the help.

Mark

 

[Lazerlike42]

The priest would retain sins if it was extremely apparent that the person was not at all sorry in any way for his sins, or that he had no intention of repenting.

For example, if you had a guy who was living with his girlfriend and they were engaging in illicit relations, and he went to confession every once in a while “just in case,” but he walked into the confessional fully intending on continuing his behavior after he stepped out, this would be such an instance.

It hardly ever happens, because it hardly ever happens that a person would go to confession without being sorry in at least some way. If your friend is of the Protestant persuasion, you might also tell him that another reason is that a person cannot even so much as desire to go to confession without a Grace from God in the first place! Therefore, anyone going would already be responsive to God’s Grace in some way and it would be very improbably for such a person to not have any contrition.

Now the key to all of this is the purpose of the retention of sins. It’s not to be mean or anything like that. The reality is that in confession, God is the one really doing the forgiving, through the priest. God sees the heart of the person, and if a person doesn’t truly have some sorrow when he goes to confession, He’s not going to truly forgive him. The priest retains the sin as an act of mercy, so that the person will not go away thinking he’s forgiven when he isn’t, and so that he will in fact perhaps be inspired towards a real contrition by the fact that the priest won’t absolve him.

Peace and God bless

 

[scaron]

Right, Lazer.

The penitent must have contrition, and a firm purpose of amendment. These (along with an integral confession) are the actual matter of the sacrament. Without them, no absolution is possible, even if the priest says the words (ie the “form” of the sacrament) “I absolve you of your sins in the name of the Father, and the Son, and the Holy Spirit”. To be a valid sacrament, you must have valid form and valid matter.

But as Lazer says, if in the course of the confession the priest discovers “invalid matter” - that there is no contrition, or no purpose of amendment - he is forbidden to give absolution. In this sense, the sins are “retained”.

But this is always by the choice of the penitent, never the Church.

 

[Joe_Kelley]

Sister Anne Shields told of going to her routine confession with her usual grocery list of venial sins, and the priest refused her absolution. He told her to come back in a week with something she was really sorry for.

I found that good advice and have since tried to focus on one or two venial sins that I have a real intent of working on.