Which is a judicial part of the binding and loosing power while the spiritual aspect extends to all righteous believers (Mt. 18:18,19; Ja. 5:16-18) which is not new in principal, but flows from the OT in which (as pertains to the judicial aspect)
If there arise a matter too hard for thee in judgment, between blood and blood, between plea and plea, and between stroke and stroke, being matters of controversy within thy gates: then shalt thou arise, and get thee up into the place which the Lord thy God shall choose; And thou shalt come unto the priests the Levites, and unto the judge that shall be in those days, and enquire; and they shall shew thee the sentence of judgment: (Deuteronomy 17:8,9)
And Westminster affirms,
It belongs to synods and councils, ministerially to determine controversies of faith, and cases of conscience; to set down rules and directions for the better ordering of the public worship of God, and government of his Church; to receive complaints in cases of maladministration, and authoritatively to determine the same..." (http://www.spurgeon.org/~phil/creeds/wcf.htm)
The question is whether dissent from which is ever justified, or when and why did they become excluded?
And when and why did employing the sword of men to punish theological dissent become sanctioned by Scripture?
And thank God for attempt at your civil demeanor.
Indeed that was an ecclesiastical gift give to the NT church, a gift that allows for excommunication from the church ...
But if for the sake of argument it referred to the forgiveness of sin ...no where does Christ tell the apostles that these gifts could be passed on ... Just one more note.. there was no such thing as "confession" to a priest until 1214... so the apostles must have "missed that