A question, regarding the keys, for those belonging to the Eastern Orthodox Church?

[Madaglan]

EDIT: As an afterthought. Madaglan, I suspect though, would probably agree with you that the power resides exclusively in apostolic succession, which of course Lutherans would dispute. IOW, I believe firmly that when my pastor/confessor announces Absolution, he does it “as a servant of Christ and by His authority”.
Jon

I would say the power resides within the Church, guided by the Holy Spirit. One can trace Apostolic succession of the episcopacy (the most common understanding of Apostolic succession), yet Apostolic succession also covers the unbroken teaching of orthodox doctrine. The Church has both elements of Apostolic succession.

Orthodox and Catholics believe in a distinct priesthood (in addition to priesthood of all believers), so their approach to Absolution is different from churches that do not believe in a distinct priesthood.

I wonder, given the tendency I’ve seen in certain Protestant writings to suggest all sins (past, present and future) are fully forgiven by Christ on the Cross, can any lay Lutheran or Protestant Christian announce Absolution? Or, is this something only an ordained minister can do?

 

[Madaglan]

Well, that’s an excellent way of looking at it, but I am still hoping that someone will answer my original question regarding the eastern bishops, (prior to the east-west schism) - stating that the keys were given to the other apostles; that was kind of why I started the thread; any citation will do?

Something like this, but substitute one of the other apostles for the name Peter:

“f we were to attend carefully to the Gospels, we should also find, in relation to those things which seem to be common to Peter . . . a great difference and a preeminence in the things [Jesus] said to Peter, compared with the second class [of apostles]. For it is no small difference that Peter received the keys not of one heaven but of more, and in order that whatsoever things he binds on earth may be bound not in one heaven but in them all, as compared with the many who bind on earth and loose on earth, so that these things are bound and loosed not in [all] the heavens, as in the case of Peter, but in one only; for they do not reach so high a stage with power as Peter to bind and loose in all the heavens” (Origen - Commentary on Matthew 13:31 [A.D. 248]).

I think the part you bolded needs to be extended to include the whole clause: For it is no small difference that Peter received the keys not of one heaven but of more. I do not mean to nit-pick here, but when you look at the entire clause, the “no small difference” does not refer to the fact that Peter received the keys (as amongst the Apostles), but rather to the fact that he received the keys of more than one heaven.

Offhand, I am not aware of any Father who directly states that the other Apostles (collectively as the Eleven or individually by name) received the keys. However, St. Cyprian, after quoting Matthew 16:18, has the following the say:

And although to all the apostles

 

[joe370]

Hey Madaglan…

I think the part you bolded needs to be extended to include the whole clause: For it is no small difference that Peter received the keys not of one heaven but of more. I do not mean to nit-pick here, but when you look at the entire clause, the “no small difference” does not refer to the fact that Peter received the keys (as amongst the Apostles), but rather to the fact that he received the keys of more than one heaven.

I agree. Good observation.

Offhand, I am not aware of any Father who directly states that the other Apostles (collectively as the Eleven or individually by name) received the keys.

I have been searching too, and I agree.

However, St. Cyprian, after quoting Matthew 16:18, has the following the say:

newadvent.org/fathers/050701.htm

It’s quite clear that St. Cyprian teaches that the power of the keys St. Peter received is also given to all the Apostles, who are of equal power. St. Peter has the primacy, but his primacy is not one of superiority. All the Apostles have the power of the keys, and there is no unique power given to St. Peter and withheld from the other Apostles.

Perhaps I overlooked the part where Cyprian teaches that all of the apostles received the keys? If there is absolutely nothing unique about the chair of Peter then why did Cyprian say:

“[After quoting Matthew 16:18f; John 21:15ff]…On him [Peter] He builds the Church, and to him He gives the command to feed the sheep; and although He assigned a like power to all the Apostles, yet he founded a single Chair, and He established by His own authority a source and an intrinsic reason for that unity. Indeed, the others were that also which Peter was; but a primacy is given to Peter, whereby it is made clear that there is but one Church and one Chair. So too, all are shepherds, and the flock is shown to be one, fed by all the Apostles in single-minded accord. If someone does not hold fast to this unity of Peter, can he imagine that he still holds the faith? If he desert the chair of Peter upon whom the Church was built, can he still be confident that he is in the Church?” (Cyprian, The Unity of the Catholic Church [first edition] 4, c. AD 251)

While there is no direct mention of the “keys”, the power mentioned by St. Cyprian is the power to bind and loose, which is the power of the keys. I do not believe one can maintain that St. Peter holds the “keys” and the “power of the keys” while the other Apostles only hold the “power of the keys”. By keys is meant the power of the keys, that is to bind and loose.

I get the whole binding and loosing thing, entrusted to the apostolate, but clearly there is something singularly unique about the chair of Peter, regarding the unity of Jesus’ church, according to Cyprian!

I think, what you are suggesting, but I could be wrong, is the fact that the keys of the kingdom given to Peter alone, and the power to bind and loose, entrusted to the entire apostolate, are synonymous, meaning that there is no significance to the keys being given to Peter alone, but again, Cyprian doesn’t seem to agree with you.

Madaglan, thank you for responding to post #1!!!

 

[JonNC]

I would say the power resides within the Church, guided by the Holy Spirit. One can trace Apostolic succession of the episcopacy (the most common understanding of Apostolic succession), yet Apostolic succession also covers the unbroken teaching of orthodox doctrine. The Church has both elements of Apostolic succession.

Orthodox and Catholics believe in a distinct priesthood (in addition to priesthood of all believers), so their approach to Absolution is different from churches that do not believe in a distinct priesthood.

I wonder, given the tendency I’ve seen in certain Protestant writings to suggest all sins (past, present and future) are fully forgiven by Christ on the Cross, can any lay Lutheran or Protestant Christian announce Absolution? Or, is this something only an ordained minister can do?

In the Lutheran tradition, only the ordained clergy can announce absolution. Only ordained clergy are confessors in private confession, and oversee the Eucharistic service. In many ways Lutherans maintained the teachings regarding the role of the special priesthood, even though in most areas except Scandinavia, we lost apostolic succession. We view AS as important, even desirable, but not a necessity to have a valid priesthood.

Jon