[Bobsvainbabblings]

I am sorry for taking so long to answer. I am only going to work on the last part of your post for clarification.

 

I am also curious which power do you think "pertains to [you] as well" in the statement you made in the same post as your reaction to John 20:23 quote? You seem to alternatively think that no one is empowered to forgive sins against God on behalf of God and that you are so empowered.  

 

What I have said is Jesus mentions forgiving sin a lot and binding and losing a little. The following scripture from Matthew 18 is the only time I can find where He describes to Peter, and me, as a disciple of Christ, whose sins Peter or I can and must forgive. 

 

21 Then Peter came to Him and said, “Lord, how often shall my brother sin against me, and I forgive him? Up to seven times?”

22 Jesus said to him, “I do not say to you, up to seven times, but up to seventy times seven. 23 Therefore the kingdom of heaven is like a certain king who wanted to settle accounts with his servants. 24 And when he had begun to settle accounts, one was brought to him who owed him ten thousand talents. 25 But as he was not able to pay, his master commanded that he be sold, with his wife and children and all that he had, and that payment be made. 26 The servant therefore fell down before him, saying, ‘Master, have patience with me, and I will pay you all.’ 27 Then the master of that servant was moved with compassion, released him, and forgave him the debt.

28 “But that servant went out and found one of his fellow servants who owed him a hundred denarii; and he laid hands on him and took him by the throat, saying, ‘Pay me what you owe!’ 29 So his fellow servant fell down at his feet [fn4] and begged him, saying, ‘Have patience with me, and I will pay you all.’ [fn5] 30 And he would not, but went and threw him into prison till he should pay the debt. 31 So when his fellow servants saw what had been done, they were very grieved, and came and told their master all that had been done. 32 Then his master, after he had called him, said to him, ‘You wicked servant! I forgave you all that debt because you begged me. 33 Should you not also have had compassion on your fellow servant, just as I had pity on you?’ 34 And his master was angry, and delivered him to the torturers until he should pay all that was due to him.

35 “So My heavenly Father also will do to you if each of you, from his heart, does not forgive his brother his trespasses.” [fn6]

 

In this situation Peter is asking Jesus how many times does he, Peter, have to forgive a man who sins against him, Peter, up to 7 times? Jesus tells him seventy times seven and goes on to explain what will happen to him if he don't. The last sentence says it all.

 

I find it ironic that a Priest will give multiple Our Father as penance to build up your character. A disciple asked Jesus to teach them how to pray. It was and still is His response.

 

Our Father in heaven, hallowed be your name, Your kingdom come, your will be done on earth as it is in heaven. Give us this day our daily bread and forgive us our trespasses/sins as we forgive those who trespass/sin against us. Lead us not into temptation and deliver us from the evil one.

 

How can you recite that without realizing God the Father is the only one who can forgive your sins against Him?

 

The scripture makes it plain Peter and us can and must forgive only a brother who has sinned against him or us.

 

If you can't find scripture where Jesus makes it plain that Peter, or any one else, can forgive your sins or sins against God for God, it is from man, not God.

 

The most important thing to learn here is we have to forgive to be forgiven.

 

May God the Father lead us all to His truth. BVB

 

 

[annalex]

The scripture makes it plain Peter and us can and must forgive only a brother who has sinned against him or us.

The Our Father prayer nor the Unnmerciful Debtor parable say that ONLY debts/offenses against them are to be forgiven. Besides, these are forgiven for the benefit of the forgiver: the Father then forgives him who is himself merciful. Further, while you can speculate that a forgiving heart will also forgive sins against others (you add "or us"), that part is not really in the prayer or in the parable. They are really about forgiving "debtors" or "my brother sin against me", that is in both cases sins against personally the one who is to forgive.

The commandment in John 20:23, however, speaks clearly of forgiving sins and the select disciples are sent in the person of Jesus (v.21) to forgive sins. They are also breathed in the Holy Ghost (22). But they already had the instruction to forgive sin against themselves from the teaching of Christ prior to resurrection. No special task would seem necessary if the purpose of this episode was to reiterate the importance of forgiving attitude. This, therefore, was a task, -- not a general moral commandment, -- given by Resurrected Christ as a part of the mission of the Church that He outlined in the last chapters of the gospels.

What will be the effects of the forgiving of sins commanded in John 20? The sins of those thus forgiven will be forgiven. This is consistent with the overall prerogative of the Church to to things on earth with the effect promised in heaven (Matthew 18:18; it does not say there that every believer but specifically the Church that can do so). This however is different from the forgiving heart commandment where the forgiver shall be therefore forgiven his, the forgiver's, sin. Next, the sins can be either forgiven or retained. But the forgiving heart commandment said nothing about retaining debts/sins against the disciple; in fact, the power to also retain sins, likewise taking effect in heaven, has nothing to do with the merciful attitude. The confessor priests sent in John 20 therefore are to become judges of sin. Finally, who is it whose sins are to be forgiven or retained? The scripture says "whoever", -- in contrast to the forgiving hear tepisodes whare it says "our debtors" and "sin against me".

The episode in John 20:21-23 explains that a select people: once receiving the Holy Ghost in that particular manner, are to not merely be of merciful attitude but also are to become judges of sin of others, regardless of who is the sin against, if anyone, to forgive the sins against God. This is the only power that belongs exclusively to God that these men are given as they are sent in the person of Christ. This is the power given them as priests.

You, for some reason ask specifically where that power is given St. Peter. The answer would be that in Matthew 16:19 a sweeping power to bind and loose is given exclusively to Peter with the keys; it is that power, given initially St. Peter as pope that is later expanded to the entire Church (Matthew 18:18)

From your next post: Do you think St. Paul and those he taught administer the Eucharist?

The correct term is "offered" or "celebrated". Not only I think so, I know so from the Holy Scripture. In 1 Cor. 11 St. Paul corrects a certain attitude spread among the Corinthians regarding the celebration of the Lord's Supper, which we now call the Eucharist. St. Paul reminds them of the words of consecration spoken by Christ at the Last Supper, the same words the priest repeats today as he elevates the consecrated bread. Then St. Paul concludes:

[26] For as often as you shall eat this bread, and drink the chalice, you shall shew the death of the Lord, until he come. Therefore whosoever shall eat this bread, or drink the chalice of the Lord unworthily, shall be guilty of the body and of the blood of the Lord. [...] [29] For he that eateth and drinketh unworthily, eateth and drinketh judgment to himself, not discerning the body of the Lord.(1 Cor. 11)

The point he makes is twofold: that the consecrated bread and the chalice "show the death" of Christ and are to be "discerned" as "the body of the Lord" and (2) if abused, it is Christ's real body and blood that suffer the abuse.

This episode shows that St. Paul understood and taught the correct Catholic doctrine of real presence of Christ in the Eucharist, that is he understood the distinction that the Protestant don't understand: between a memorial meal to remember the sacrifice of Christ and the actual Sacrifice becoming visible at the Holy Mass.