Gospel of John and Confession

[zz912]

For those that hold to the belief that when Jesus gives the power to forgive sins to the Apostles, and this authority expires with the death of the Apostles, something occurred to me I thought may be troublesome to this line of thinking.

With the Gospel of John, when it was being written by the Apostle John, he was the last, or one of the last depending on when you believe it was written, Apostle(s) left. Now the line in question is

20:23 Whose sins you forgive are forgiven them, and whose sins you retain are retained."

And just a few short verses later, he says:

20:30 Now Jesus did many other signs in the presence of (his) disciples that are not written in this book.

And then concludes the Gospel in the next chapter with this:

21:25 There are also many other things that Jesus did, but if these were to be described individually, I do not think the whole world would contain the books that would be written.

Twice he states that not everything that Jesus did would be able to be written down, but he takes time to specifically state that the Apostles were given this authority. Why? He is writing this Gospel down late in life, as the only Apostle left. Why would he bother inserting this in there if the authority was to end with his death? Wouldn’t the space for writing this down been better served to write down something that would be a permanent teaching of the Church? It is not like his authority was questioned. In fact, the verse:

*21:24 It is this disciple who testifies to these things and has written them, and we know that his testimony is true.
*
refutes this thinking because his authority is the basis for believing the Gospel.

So why write down something that will end in a few years with his death? The other Gospels covered this issue and the teaching if it were to only apply to the age of the Apostles. The only other reason I could come up with is to posit that he wrote unessential material in the Gospel. But this brings up many more issues and is heretical as well.

Your thoughts?

 

[seanflynn]

Those four verses are some of my favorite in all of scripture! You asked for our thoughts, these are mine:

I wish I had more contact with faithful protestants so I could show them such truth.

Why would any teaching of Jesus have an expiration date or sunset clause?

I think you’re probably too proud of your logic, zz912, and wanted to share, so you sort of put it in the form of a question. I definitely struggle with that type of pride, but if you are sure you have other reasons, please forgive my assumption. It might be worth examing, though.

 

[reggieM]

It’s interesting also that nowhere does it state that this authority ends with the death of the apostles. That is an interpretation added to Scripture.

 

[po18guy]

Those four verses are some of my favorite in all of scripture! You asked for our thoughts, these are mine:

I wish I had more contact with faithful protestants so I could show them such truth.

Why would any teaching of Jesus have an expiration date or sunset clause?

I think you’re probably too proud of your logic, zz912, and wanted to share, so you sort of put it in the form of a question. I definitely struggle with that type of pride, but if you are sure you have other reasons, please forgive my assumption. It might be worth examing, though.

I don’t know about pride - it could very well have arrived as a form of private revelation. It is difficult to remain silent about that. The problem with non-Catholic/Orthodox Christians is that they limit themselves to the self-admittedly incomplete bible. They often do not read the early Church fathers, or delve deeply into Church history. Their bibles frequently change Paul’s word “traditions” into “teachings”, a much less Catholic term. Much of their theology is designed to oppose Catholic/Orthodox beliefs - out of necessity. To a certain extent, they must be not only Christian, but also anti-Catholic, otherwise they can not explain their continued separation from the Church.

Jesus clearly gave the Apostles authority over “whatever”, which includes an awful lot, last time I looked into it. However, much of the “whatever” remains in Church tradition, and is not specifically written of in the bible. I view ‘bible only’ as being the modern equivalent of the Apostle Thomas, who demanded proof before he would believe. Those who rely on the bible demand written evidence before they will believe. But, as with Thomas, many have been converted by spending time before our Lord in the Blessed Sacrament - Jesus with us.

As to confession, have a look at Nehemiah 9. - public confession is described. Read James 5:16: “therefore, confess your sins to one another”. It’s in the bible, they just don’t believe it.

 

[gurneyhalleck1]

Evangelically-minded guys like John Stott believe that the admonition by Christ to the apostles to bind and loose sins, etc. was nothing but an admonition to teach the Gospel. In exposing the flock to the Gospel message one opens the gates of heaven and forgiveness. In rejecting the Gospel one finds retention of sins and certain doom. That is Stott’s position…that the binding and loosing of sins totally rested in the teaching and preaching of the Word, not in a formal ministerial ritual of forgiveness. I found that an interesting hypothesis. Not saying I buy it. Just interesting to see the Evangelical angle.

 

[po18guy]

Evangelically-minded guys like John Stott believe that the admonition by Christ to the apostles to bind and loose sins, etc. was nothing but an admonition to teach the Gospel. In exposing the flock to the Gospel message one opens the gates of heaven and forgiveness. In rejecting the Gospel one finds retention of sins and certain doom. That is Stott’s position…that the binding and loosing of sins totally rested in the teaching and preaching of the Word, not in a formal ministerial ritual of forgiveness. I found that an interesting hypothesis. Not saying I buy it. Just interesting to see the Evangelical angle.

It never ceases to amaze me the new twists on some of the plainest scriptures written. Direct, declarative sentences have now attained some cosmic import. Hmmmm… one wonders why Christ, in Matthew 28:19, did not say “Therefore, go, bind and loose in all nations” Good grief!

What a tremendous price the truth pays for some to be “non-Catholic”. Clearly, Saint Peter was a prophet when he wrote his second letter.

 

[zz912]

Those four verses are some of my favorite in all of scripture! You asked for our thoughts, these are mine:

I wish I had more contact with faithful protestants so I could show them such truth.

Why would any teaching of Jesus have an expiration date or sunset clause?

I think you’re probably too proud of your logic, zz912, and wanted to share, so you sort of put it in the form of a question. I definitely struggle with that type of pride, but if you are sure you have other reasons, please forgive my assumption. It might be worth examing, though.

Oh pride and arrogance are certainly sins that I fight daily with, but not so much in this case. These thoughts came to me and I thought it was pretty tight logic, and wanted to see the counter point to this line of thinking.

 

[wmscott]

Those four verses are some of my favorite in all of scripture! You asked for our thoughts, these are mine:

I wish I had more contact with faithful protestants so I could show them such truth.

Why would any teaching of Jesus have an expiration date or sunset clause?

I think you’re probably too proud of your logic, zz912, and wanted to share, so you sort of put it in the form of a question. I definitely struggle with that type of pride, but if you are sure you have other reasons, please forgive my assumption. It might be worth examing, though.

I really have to disagree here. Zz912 is, as I am, a convert to the beautiful Catholic faith. In the conversion process there are many beliefs that are inconsistent with Catholic teaching that need to be dispelled and corrected. Zz912 has done what I had to do at one point in my conversion process. Come to terms with a previous anti-Catholic falsehood or erroneous belief of what Catholicism teaches.

Of all the anti-Catholic falsehoods that I was feed in my early years, the one that stuck with me the most was Catholics worship idols. I had to get past that and reconcile it with the first of the Ten Commandments; Exodus 20:2-6 *"I, the LORD, am your God, who brought you out of the land of Egypt, that place of slavery. You shall not have other gods besides me. You shall not carve idols for yourselves in the shape of anything in the sky above or on the earth below or in the waters beneath the earth; you shall not bow down before them or worship them. For I, the LORD, your God, am a jealous God, inflicting punishment for their fathers’ wickedness on the children of those who hate me, down to the third and fourth generation; but bestowing mercy down to the thousandth generation, on the children of those who love me and keep my commandments. *

It took some time, and no amount of explaining form the RCIA group, the Priest, my wife and friends could put it into proper perspective. It was only through prayer and the guidance of the Holy Spirit that I came to my “epiphany” that I was able to reconcile with the Catholic position regarding icons and intercessory prayer.

Zz912 may have had his/her HS lead “epiphany” regarding confession and the Catholic teaching on this. I just may be possible that zz912 is articulating how the HS moved him/her and is sharing with us the rational used to reconcile a previous misconception.

Let’s not look for fault, but rather praise a brother or sister on having the faith and the truth revealed to them.

 

[Anna_Scott]

. . . . .The problem with non-Catholic/Orthodox Christians is that they limit themselves to the self-admittedly incomplete bible. They often do not read the early Church fathers, or delve deeply into Church history. Their bibles frequently change Paul’s word “traditions” into “teachings”, a much less Catholic term. Much of their theology is designed to oppose Catholic/Orthodox beliefs - out of necessity. To a certain extent, they must be not only Christian, but also anti-Catholic, otherwise they can not explain their continued separation from the Church.

Be careful about making sweeping assumptions about non-Catholic/Orthodox Christians. I have been affiliated with a conservative Episcopal Church/Anglican Communion, since Jan. 2010.

Anglican Cannon:

VI. Of the Sufficiency of the Holy Scriptures for Salvation.

Holy Scripture containeth all things necessary to salvation: so that whatsoever is not read
therein, nor may be proved thereby, is not to be required of any man, that it should be
believed as an article of the Faith, or be thought requisite or necessary to salvation. In the
name of the Holy Scripture we do understand those canonical Books of the Old and New
Testament, of whose authority was never any doubt in the Church.

Of the Names and Number of the Canonical Books
Genesis
The First Book of Samuel
The Book of Esther
Exodus
The Second Book of Samuel
The Book of Job
Leviticus
The First Book of Kings
The Psalms,
Numbers
The Second Book of Kings
The Proverbs
Deuteronomy
The First Book of Chronicles
Ecclesiastes or Preacher
Joshua
The Second Book of Chronicles
Cantica or Songs of Solomon
Judges
The First Book of Esdras
Four Prophets the greater
Ruth
The Second Book of Esdras
Twelve Prophets the less.

And the other Books (as Hierome saith) the Church doth read for example of life and
instruction of manners; but yet doth it not apply them to establish any doctrine; such are
these following:

The Third Book of Esdras
The rest of the Book of Esther
The Fourth Book of Esdras
The Book of Wisdom
The Book of Tobias
Jesus the Son of Sirach
The Book of Judith
Baruch the Prophet

The Book of Common Prayer, 868 Historical Documents

The Song of the Three Children, The Prayer of Manasses,
The Story of Susanna, The First Book of Maccabees,
Of Bel and the Dragon, The Second Book of Maccabees.

All the Books of the New Testament, as they are commonly received, we do receive, and
account them Canonical.

VII. Of the Old Testament.

The Old Testament is not contrary to the New: for both in the Old and New Testament
everlasting life is offered to Mankind by Christ, who is the only Mediator between God and
Man, being both God and Man. Wherefore they are not to be heard, which feign that the
old Fathers did look only for transitory promises. Although the Law given from God by
Moses, as touching Ceremonies and Rites, do not bind Christian men, nor the Civil precepts thereof ought of necessity to be received in any commonwealth; yet notwithstanding, no Christian man whatsoever is free from the obedience of the Commandments which are called Moral.

We also confess our sins and are granted absolution by a Priest, both corporately and in private.

We are a liturgical (“high church”) and Sacramental Church. Our liturgy resembles the Catholic Mass; some prayers are the same word for word. Every service is centered around the Eucharist. We do believe in the “Real Presence” and the Communion of the Saints and revere the Blessed Virgin Mary.

We also look to “tradition” and the writings of the ECF’s. The Pope and Popes of the past are quoted in lessons.

I recently purchased The Catechism of the Catholic Church; and find it to be an invaluable source in my Biblical studies.

Yet, I am a non-Catholic, non—Orthodox Christian-at least at this point. I’m about as close to Catholic as one can be without actually being Catholic.

Anna

 

[po18guy]

Be careful about making sweeping assumptions about non-Catholic/Orthodox Christians. I have been affiliated with a conservative Episcopal Church/Anglican Communion, since Jan. 2010.

No intent to offend, I assure you. I must separate all other Christians form the Catholic/Orthodox for reasons to follow. A faith community either has a Bishop or Patriarch with ordination tracing back to the Twelve, or they do not. They either hold to sola scriptura or they do not. Despite the many similarities in appearance and its roots in the Catholic Church, the structural and doctrinal differences today are substantial between the Episcopal and Catholic/Orthodox.

We also confess our sins and are granted absolution by a Priest, both corporately and in private. We are a liturgical (“high church”) and Sacramental Church. Our liturgy resembles the Catholic Mass; some prayers are the same word for word. Every service is centered around the Eucharist. We do believe in the “Real Presence” and the Communion of the Saints and revere the Blessed Virgin Mary. We also look to “tradition” and the writings of the ECF’s. The Pope and Popes of the past are quoted in lessons. I recently purchased The Catechism of the Catholic Church; and find it to be an invaluable source in my Biblical studies.

This has all served to prepare you for the next step in faith.

Yet, I am a non-Catholic, non—Orthodox Christian-at least at this point. I’m about as close to Catholic as one can be without actually being Catholic. Anna

You are but one step from being Home. I will pray for you.

 

[Mikeoffaith]

No intent to offend, I assure you. I must separate all other Christians form the Catholic/Orthodox for reasons to follow. A faith community either has a Bishop or Patriarch with ordination tracing back to the Twelve, or they do not.

This is what I love about absolutes. Here you have claimed that your particular faith community has a bishop who has an ordination tracing back to one of the Apostles. So do it, go ahead and recite your bishops apostolic genealogy. Now explain to Anna how TEC does not have Apostolic Succession even through the Dutch Touch or to the Lutherans of the Nordic countries whose bishops have had hand on head succession since the formation of their dioceses.

They either hold to sola scriptura or they do not. Despite the many similarities in appearance and its roots in the Catholic Church, the structural and doctrinal differences today are substantial between the Episcopal and Catholic/Orthodox.

Sola Scriptura is not as cut and dried as most people of the Roman Church think of it as being. Those of us not in communion with Rome are always accused of not understanding Roman Catholic teaching. But at the same time most of the people in the Roman Church do not understand fully the teachings of COE or The Lutheran Church especially when it comes to Sola Scriptura. However, I could make the charge against Rome that at times they use Sola Scriptura for their own formation of ideas. Again, I will point out a famous example. Galileo. The poor man says the Earth goes round the Sun. The Inquisition and Rome say no scripture clearly states that the Earth is the center of the universe so believing or promoting heliocentrism is an heresy.

This has all served to prepare you for the next step in faith. You are but one step from being Home. I will pray for you.

Anne you are a credit to your faith and good steward to TEC. Unless you feel differently, you are home. And I will pray for you too, but not so that your eyes are finally opened to come to the Lutheran Church or in the eyes of po18guy for you to finally realize how erred your church is.

 

[po18guy]

This is what I love about absolutes.

Is division to be desired in the Body of Christ?

 

[Anna_Scott]

Be careful about making sweeping assumptions about non-Catholic/Orthodox Christians. I have been affiliated with a conservative Episcopal Church/Anglican Communion, since Jan. 2010. . . . .

We also confess our sins and are granted absolution by a Priest, both corporately and in private.

We are a liturgical (“high church”) and Sacramental Church. Our liturgy resembles the Catholic Mass; some prayers are the same word for word. Every service is centered around the Eucharist. We do believe in the “Real Presence” and the Communion of the Saints and revere the Blessed Virgin Mary.

We also look to “tradition” and the writings of the ECF’s. The Pope and Popes of the past are quoted in lessons. . . .

No intent to offend, I assure you. I must separate all other Christians form the Catholic/Orthodox for reasons to follow. A faith community either has a Bishop or Patriarch with ordination tracing back to the Twelve, or they do not. They either hold to sola scriptura or they do not. Despite the many similarities in appearance and its roots in the Catholic Church, the structural and doctrinal differences today are substantial between the Episcopal and Catholic/Orthodox. . . . .

This is what I love about absolutes. Here you have claimed that your particular faith community has a bishop who has an ordination tracing back to one of the Apostles. So do it, go ahead and recite your bishops apostolic genealogy. Now explain to Anna how TEC does not have Apostolic Succession even through the Dutch Touch or to the Lutherans of the Nordic countries whose bishops have had hand on head succession since the formation of their dioceses. . . .

Sola Scriptura is not as cut and dried as most people of the Roman Church think of it as being. Those of us not in communion with Rome are always accused of not understanding Roman Catholic teaching. But at the same time most of the people in the Roman Church do not understand fully the teachings of COE or The Lutheran Church especially when it comes to Sola Scriptura. However, I could make the charge against Rome that at times they use Sola Scriptura for their own formation of ideas. Again, I will point out a famous example. Galileo. The poor man says the Earth goes round the Sun. The Inquisition and Rome say no scripture clearly states that the Earth is the center of the universe so believing or promoting heliocentrism is an heresy. . . . .

Mikeoffaith,

I really appreciate your comments. I am at home in TEC. I continue to study and pray. Though, the more I read, the more I realize there is so much I don’t know.

po18guy,

There are ways of speaking about differences that bring us closer to unity, rather than drive us farther apart.

I have been in discussions on CAF threads where the main participants in the discussion were Catholic, Episcopal/Anglican, Lutheran, and Methodist. In one particular thread, we realized we are not really so different. That was one of those “ah-ha moments,” which gave us all a deeper desire for unity.

I must separate all other Christians form the Catholic/Orthodox for reasons to follow. A faith community either has a Bishop or Patriarch with ordination tracing back to the Twelve, or they do not.

po18guy,

If you look at my post, you will see that we agree on many things. Yet, you dismissed all common ground, and went straight to division, saying, “I must separate all other Christians form the Catholic/Orthodox for reasons to follow. . . .”

I realize there is a “valid orders”/Apostolic Succession disagreement. It has been going on for centuries.

Remember, I agreed with confession of our sins to a Priest, and his authority to grant Absolution–in answer to the OP’s question.

Our disagreement lies in the way in which a Priest is given “valid orders”/authority. I offer this link as a sidebar. You may have already read it. If not, it is very interesting in the discussion of the Catholic Church and Anglican authority–though I do not wish to derail this thread and head down the “authority road.” This is given only FYI:

Link: vatican.va/roman_curia/pontifical_councils/chrstuni/documents/rc_pc_chrstuni_doc_12051999_gift-of-autority_en.html

THE GIFT OF AUTHORITY (Authority in the Church III)

I. INTRODUCTION

1. The dialogue between Anglicans and Roman Catholics has (1)shown significant signs of progress on the question of authority in the Church. This progress can already be seen in the convergence in understanding of authority achieved by previous ARCIC statements, notably: . . . .

**
Mikeoffaith **made a very good point regarding Sola Scriptura.

Sola Scriptura is a misunderstood term, even among Protestants. In fact, a new term was born out of the debate over Sola Scriptura: Solo Scriptura. So, this is not a simple issue.

I believe the Bible contains all that is necessary for our salvation; which seems to be consistent with CC (please correct me if I am wrong):

107 The inspired books teach the truth. “Since therefore all that the inspired authors or sacred writers affirm should be regarded as affirmed by the Holy Spirit, we must acknowledge that the books of Scripture firmly, faithfully, and without error teach that truth which God, for the sake of our salvation, wished to see confided to the Sacred Scriptures.”

I realize the Gospel was transmitted orally, before it was ever put into written form. I acknowledge the role of “tradition” in the interpretation of Scripture. So, in this sense I do not claim Sola Scriptura.

It is my sincere hope and prayer that we, as Christians, will come to unity in Christ.

Anna

 

[guanophore]

Be careful about making sweeping assumptions about non-Catholic/Orthodox Christians…Yet, I am a non-Catholic, non—Orthodox Christian-at least at this point. I’m about as close to Catholic as one can be without actually being Catholic.

Anna

Thank you for your charitable, gentle correction and personal witness. What a treasure it is to have you here.

 

[Anna_Scott]

Thank you for your charitable, gentle correction and personal witness. What a treasure it is to have you here.

guanophore,

I don’t think anyone has put “treasure” and “me” in the same sentence, at least not here.

I just posted again. I do pray for the unity of all Christians.

Anna

P.S. with more than 18,000 posts, when do you sleep?

 

[zz912]

However, I could make the charge against Rome that at times they use Sola Scriptura for their own formation of ideas. Again, I will point out a famous example. Galileo. The poor man says the Earth goes round the Sun. The Inquisition and Rome say no scripture clearly states that the Earth is the center of the universe so believing or promoting heliocentrism is an heresy.

Actually that’s not true. Heliocentrism had been a theory discussed for a century or two before Galileo, and discussed quite a bit in the Church. Galileo’s work on that didn’t land him in trouble at all. He got into trouble when he started dabbling into reinterpreting Scripture. Most current history books distort what really happened to grind a particular axe against the Church.

 

[Mikeoffaith]

Is division to be desired in the Body of Christ?

No division is not to be desired in the Body of Christ. However, pride on both sides is the continuing cause of division in the Body of Christ.

 

[Mikeoffaith]

Actually that’s not true. Heliocentrism had been a theory discussed for a century or two before Galileo, and discussed quite a bit in the Church. Galileo’s work on that didn’t land him in trouble at all. He got into trouble when he started dabbling into reinterpreting Scripture. Most current history books distort what really happened to grind a particular axe against the Church.

Actually, I think you need to read “Dialogo sopra i due massimi sistemi del mondo”, I don’t see any reinterpretation of scripture in there. But if you need to say that modern history has it all wrong and has completely distorted it. Then in that case I would imagine that the Congregation of the Index that had on it’s Index of Prohibited Books list “De revolutionibus orbium coelestium” by Copernicus until 1835 was a corruption of modern history as well.

 

[po18guy]

No division is not to be desired in the Body of Christ. However, pride on both sides is the continuing cause of division in the Body of Christ.

Are all churches equal?

 

[gurneyhalleck1]

Poguy, this argument actually strengthens the Anglican argument of validity and legitimacy. The Anglicans back in the early 20th century had co-consecrations with the Utrecht Old Catholic Church bishops. So let’s pretend for a minute that Leo’s Apostolicae Curae in the late 1800’s was true. Even if it were, the “Dutch Touch” of the early 1900’s re-infused apostolic succession lines back into the episcopacy of countless bishops and priests worldwide. It’s hard not to find a priest or bishop who has not been re-infused by the “Dutch Touch.” You can easily find anglo-catholic parishes that believe in transubstantiation, confession, benediction, Marian dogmas, have valid apostolic succession, incense, the whole nine yards. So from that standpoint, the debate is moot. If you want to put the pope in the mix and say that unity with him is the ONLY valid sign of true catholicism and orthodox belief, then you’d be right…Anglicanism lacks that, deliberately.

No intent to offend, I assure you. I must separate all other Christians form the Catholic/Orthodox for reasons to follow. A faith community either has a Bishop or Patriarch with ordination tracing back to the Twelve, or they do not. They either hold to sola scriptura or they do not. Despite the many similarities in appearance and its roots in the Catholic Church, the structural and doctrinal differences today are substantial between the Episcopal and Catholic/Orthodox.

This has all served to prepare you for the next step in faith.

You are but one step from being Home. I will pray for you.