Table of Contents
Parent: JesusWordsOnly
Unwarranted Catholic Tradition Expanded Apostolic 'Binding 'Authority
Then what did Jesus mean by saying that "whatever" the apostles bound or loosed on earth was bound or loosed in heaven? (Matt. 16:19.) The simple answer is the judicial function of adjudicating cases. It did not authorize them to make up new laws or doctrine not already given by God/Jesus. There are several clear proofs this was Jesus' meaning.
First, Jesus' terminology of 'binding-and-loosing' clearly was a reference to what a first century Christian knew was a function of a judge. In that day and consistently up until only a century ago, a judge would "bind" or "loose" a prisoner with a leather strap. Jesus was merely alluding to what Jesus repeatedly told the twelve early in His ministry: they were going to be the "twelve judges" who were judging the "twelve tribes of Israel." Such judicial authority did not make them individually or corporately oracles of God or some new Moses-like law-givers from God. Such judicial authority merely allowed their decision on judicial matters to be bound in heaven.
- It is true this statement was actually spoken to Peter alone upon his being the first to confess Jesus was Messiah. However, as this discussion progresses, we shall see in John 20:21-23, Jesus will give all the apostles the Holy Spirit, and extend this power to all of them.
31 .Gill (a Protestant commentator) insists the Talmud shows "times without number" this means the ability to declare what is "lawful and unlawful..." and God would have to accept such decrees in heaven. However, Gill is speaking too broadly. There is an important distinction. It is a judge's function to declare in the particular what is lawfi.il/unlawful, reasoning from a general law. Such a role of the judges of Israel was not an authority to make up new laws or principles. Jesus refuted continually they had an authority to do so. When religious authorities do so, Jesus said then the people end up worshipping God with their lips, but their worship is empty. (Matt. 15:9.) For a full discussion of that passage, see page 71 et seq.
32.See page 14 et seq.
Second, Jesus explained a judicial authority is intended in (Matt. 16:19) (binding/loosing) by means of an exactly parallel statement in John 20:21-23 where we read:
(22) And when he had said this, he breathed on them, and saith
unto them, Receive ye the Holy Spirit:
(23) whose soever sins ye forgive, they are forgiven unto them;
whose soever sins ye retain, they are retained. (John 20:22-23) ASV.
Thus, the authority the apostles enjoyed was the power to bind their decisions on guilt or forgiveness in heaven as on earth.
It was a later Roman Catholic innovation to make this apostolic authority into more than it really was. The Catholic church claimed this 'binding' and 'loosing' meant an oraclelike power. This was to their advantage because they taught this power belonged to each individual pope who became the bishop of Rome in the footsteps of Peter. Each pope was thereby an 'infallible' oracle of God. Whatever the pope taught was de facto on par with what Jesus ever said.
-
The Catholic Encyclopedia defines infallibility of the pope as: "it means exemption from the possibility of error." ( http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/07790a.htm (accessed 1/17/07).) Yet, the Catholic church will insist this does not mean the pope is inspired. Rather, the Holy Spirit supposedly gives the pope an infallible decision on doctrine. The distinction is one without a difference.
-
Clarke is a Protestant example of how to read (Matt. 16:19). "The disciples of our Lord, from having the keys, i.e. the true knowledge of the doctrine of the kingdom of heaven, should be able at all times to... pronounce infallible judgment ; and this binding and loosing... should be considered as proceeding immediately from heaven, and consequently as Divinely ratified
Pauline Protestants have proven equally anxious to have the twelve apostles have such demi-god status. Such Protestants unhesitatingly ascribe the same infallibility to each of the twelve based on this "binding and loosing" verse. 34 This way we evangelicals have been able to extend this mantle of infallibility to Paul. We do so on the presumption that Paul's claim to being an apostle is valid. However, Paul was not one of the twelve apostles and did not enjoy whatever power Jesus was giving the twelve. Regardless, such an interpretation of Jesus' remarks is a Roman Catholic anachronism which needs to be finally recognized as such.
We must eject all Catholic traditions that do not have a warrant in the Bible itself. The notion of apostolic authority as binding in delivery of unique new doctrines, rather than when issuing a judicial decision or with inspiration relaying Jesus' words, is wholly unwarranted. This was a self-serving expansion of apostolic authority by the Catholic church. It is connived at by Pauline Protestants who find such doctrine conducive to giving an elevated importance to Paul's words.