3 ms·
If I'm getting the names of the specific doctrines wrong - apologies, but the principle goes to way before they were formally defined. And yes retroactively -
by seemslegit 7y ago
If I'm getting the names of the specific doctrines wrong - apologies, but the principle goes to way before they were formally defined.
And yes retroactively - "You bind on earth" is present tense, "will be bound in heaven" is future tense - unless this is a translation artifact there is a clear causal ordering specified here.
- dragonwriter 7y ago> And yes retroactively - "You bind on earth" is present tense, "will be bound in heaven" is future tense Yes, and it refers not to changing what God wanted in the past (which would be retroactive, but isn't what a present tense action having future tense effects would indicate; it's not “whatever you bind on Earth will have been bound in Heaven”, which would plausibly describe a retroactive effect, or alternatively or pre-ordained one) but the future consequences of sin. Again, the quote you point to is the basis for doctrine about absolution of sin in confession, not the ecclesiastical infallibility either in general or in the specific form of papal infallibility, which are not closely related doctrines.
- seemslegit 7y agoAll the doctrines that deal with church-heavens relations are pretty closely related for the purpose we are discussing here, the reason I say Matthew 18:18 implies retroactive action is that this is the only way God can be said to remain the origin of moral judgement rather than merely its executor. If like Judaism Catholicism considers God as somewhat supra-temporal this kind of retroactivity should not be problematic.