A few years back, I was attending an LCMS church (contemporary style/ not confessional) that offered communion every week with no confession and no absolution. Needless to say, it bothered me. We moved two years ago, went to a local LCMS congregation, and after confession, when the pastor said the words of absolution, I found myself bursting out in tears. I didn’t realize how badly I needed to hear those words. On a side note, I believe there is a direct correlation between the rise of anxiety and depression in kids and teens and young adults because they do not know what to do with their brokenness and sin. Thanks for explaining this so simply today.
In my years working in restaurants, I've seen managers give free meals away. Never once have I seen a customer say, "No, only the owner of the restaurant can give out free meals!" Or "That's all well and good, but in my heart, I don't FEEL like this meal is free." People are thankful for the free meal. Dear Christians friends, when a pastor forgives your sins in the name and by the authority of Christ Jesus, your sins are forgiven!
The scripture says if you confess your sins, HE is faithful and just to forgive your sins and cleanse you from all unrighteousness. the HE refers to christ himself. No priest needed. The scripture also says that there is ONE mediator between man and God, the person christ Jesus.
@@Titus2_13 That's not what John 20 says, though. Jesus breathed on the apostles and told them "Receive the Holy Spirit. If you forgive the sins of any, they are forgiven. If you retain the sins of any, they are retained."
@@Titus2_13 Then why would Jesus even say it? That's like saying "If you eat someone's sandwich, it is eaten," as if that were not perfectly obvious. That's meaningless. What Jesus is saying is that if we forgive the sins of the repentant, that's the same as God forgiving their sins.
@@LutheranMockingbird we have to read all of scripture in context with itself. If it looks like 1 verse contradicts all others, that means we are misinterpreting it.
One of the things that has actually sold me on confession and absolution (apart from what Scripture itself says) is that it's spoken about in the early church, and not only Luther, but even Calvin and John Wesley, believed in using them. Interesting to note.
I'm not expert enough about the evolution of Protestantism to say, but it seems logical to me that if you eliminate the concept of "priesthood" and of "apostolic succession" you must also eliminate the sacrament of confession as a consequence, because the mediation is no more necessary. Luther was a catholic monk before the reform, and he used to practice confession, so he maybe recognized the "human" value of the practice, even if he didn't recognize the "sacramental" value of it, but those after him gave less importance to this aspect. In my opinion there is also a problem related with the doctrine of justification: if the doctrine of justification according to Luther (correct me if I'm wrong) says that Jesus "covers" your sins by his passion and death, sins cannot be "deleted" from your soul. According to Orthodoxy and Catholicism in the process of conversion by the sacrament of penance, Jesus really cancel your sins and operate a "transformation" of your human nature, restoring it more and more at his image, so that you can participate to the same life of God himself. I therefore have a question: is all that possible in a protestant prospective? Does Baptism "cancel" or "cover" your sins? And when you ask forgiveness to God for a personal sin (without the mediation of a priest) what does actually happen?
@@thomastr914 The protestant doctrine is that "His passion and death" washes away the sin, so it "deletes." Next part: yes. Armenians and Lutherans would also include the Eucharist as part of the continual transformation process. Calvinists, Baptists hold the rememberance alone view. Does baptism? For protestants: "Perhaps the most convincing refutation of the view that baptism is necessary for salvation are those who were saved apart from baptism. The penitent woman (Luke 7:37-50), the paralytic man (Matthew 9:2), the publican (Luke 18:13-14), and the thief on the cross (Luke 23:39-43) all experienced forgiveness of sins apart from baptism." So no the sincere spiritual profession of faith in the redemptive power of Jesus Christ and His sacrifice cancel the Heavenly consequences of sin; baptism is the physical act to demonstrate commitment, and done if possible. If one asks AND repents (strives as best as possible and then a little more umph, to not sin again), it is forgiven the same as priest or pastor or fellow member of the church for the investment of power is the Holy Spirit that dwells within: 1 Corinthians 6:19 " What? know ye not that your body is the temple of the Holy Ghost which is in you, which ye have of God, and ye are not your own?". Prior to around 300 AD when Emperor Constantine ceased the persecution of Christians and made it legal, churches were small gatherings in peoples homes (which were tiny by modern american standards), and confessions were oft done before the entire body of those gathered. Back to the beginning: eliminating the priesthood: no, the investure is from the Holy Spirit, few chose to study the Word thoroughly enough to act as shepards (pastors) of the populace. Most protestants groups still have deacons, priests/pastors and bishops. eliminating apostolic succession: varies; on the yes it ended side it would be the Apostles were those directly invested by the risen Christ with power, power of tongues, miracles, etc. and the Aposolitic status ended with them with those afterwards being only capable of being apostles and not Apostles. on the other side (no, it didn't end) goes with Rome, the capital of the western pagan world got its tendrils into power structure of the Vatican, wormed its way in and up, taking focus away from the direct words left to us by the Apostles. And when the Word was used to question the actions of the Roman Church, especially its authority, the authority by decree (Trent) declared anathema (ie to be damned to hell which in the physical world to be exiled or killed) those who questioned the authority of the Vatican, the magisterium even if the questions were sincere using the Word nor was peaceful discourse permitted. So the traditional protestant view is the apostolic succession continues, but not from the Vatican, and in humility and the reverence toward the Apostles, the terminology fell out of usage.
As a Catholic I have learned so many powerful ways to understand and talk about biblical, historical, liturgical practice in our Christian walk. I have also learned so much about Lutheranism and how the Holy Spirit moves throughout the whole catholic church! Honestly I have never , ever heard a protestant talk about the faith without it just being a chain of scriptures held together by personal feeling or American cultural norms and ideas. I never heard a protestant talk about history at all and you have opened my eyes. God bless and thanks Pastor!
This is awesome. The only caveat I would add is that i only see priests (pastors in your context) as having apostolic authority to pronounce absolution. But otherwise we are in full agreement here. Pretty awesome brother
Confession and absolution are necessary regularly, because despite popular opinion, future sins are not washed away at your baptism nor are they washed away because of a prayer one said years ago hiring an altar call.
For any denomination that calls it the “ altar call” and they have no altar and the Pastor stands there it looks like they are praying to the Pastor!! When they really don’t understand what an altar is!
They say the same with Baptism (as real and effectual mean of grace) and Holly Communion (as real and effectual mean of grace). They (evangelicals) say ''What? That's so Eastern Orthodox!''
We still do. Lutherans without equivocation teach that Holy Absolution is the true word of God to the absolved. Augsburg Defense XIII: _Of the Number and Use of the Sacraments_ says, "Therefore Baptism, the Lord’s Supper, and Absolution, which is the Sacrament of Repentance, are truly Sacraments."
Hey Pastor Wolfmueller, how do you respond to people when they say that John chapter 20 is talking about personal forgiveness between one another for sins against each other (like Eph 4:32) and not the pastor on behalf of God (Baptists like to use this one)?
Hi guys - quick question. Does anyone know why the LCMS believes (as Bryan mentions in the video) that the pastors especially have authority to forgive sins/offer absolution. Obviously in the Catholic faith it is believed that the priests and bishops are the direct heirs (in an unbroken line) to the power bestowed upon the apostles by Christ to forgive sins. Do LCMS pastors also believe their ordination bestows a special type of grace or authority? And for what reason? Would LOVE it if someone could answer this burning question!
@@PastorBryanWolfmueller Thank you pastor! Sorry, from the video I thought perhaps pastors had a special authority in that realm according to LCMS doctrine. God bless you and the work you do - you're my Sunday sermon (I go to church, but the denominations here are all "Church of Nice" and don't challenge me spiritually.
The idea that every Christian has the authority to forgive sins is simply ridiculous and totally unbiblical. In John 20:23, Jesus is not preaching to the masses. He is breathing his Holy Spirit into his Apostles and to them only he is giving this authority. If you do not have apostolic succession, you do not have authority to forgive sins. No self proclaimed pastor has any authority to forgive sins. The idea the I myself, as a Christian, can go around and forgive (or not forgive!) people randomly and God is bound by my declarations is unreal. Using Pastor’s analogy, it is as if that judge gave everyone in the city the power to go and unlock the prison cells of whoever they want to free and to keep locked the cells of whoever they do not want to free. Total anarchy and madness. The sacrament of confession is a serious sacrament and needs to be administered by those appointed by Jesus to speak in his name, in persona Christi.
@@B27-o2c of course they are not, because they were not validly ordained. Lutherans reject Holy Orders as a sacrament. Lutherans believe that anyone can be a pastor as long as he is called to be one by a congregation. This is not how it has ever worked in the Church from day one. Luther invented this framework out of the blue because he didn’t have any other possibility if he wanted to build his church outside of the Catholic Church.
question- is the general declaration of forgiveness/absolution in service required for a person to be forgiven? In other words- are we not forgiven daily in our private time of confessing to God until we officially hear the words of absolution from the pastor on Sunday? Or is the corporate absolution just one way we can receive God's forgiveness?
Forgiveness is given in abundance by God. Corporate absolution is merely one way to hear the promise, and is meant to only bring comfort to the troubled conscience.
Lutheran priests think they can forgive my sins. This is a misunderstanding of MT. 16:18 and 18:18. Christ was talking to Jews who understood perfectly what He was talking about.
Jack Tyrell, brother, don’t forget about John 20:19-23. Jesus quite clearly teaches here that He gives special authority to His church on earth to forgive the sins of repentant sinners, and withhold forgiveness from the unrepentant, as long as they do not repent. This is to be understood as if it is from Christ Himself (because it is). It is from His divine command. From the liturgy, the pastor, proceeding the confession, says, “Upon this your confession I, by virtue of my office, as a called and ordained servant of the Word, announce the grace of God unto all of you, and in the stead and by the command of my Lord Jesus Christ I forgive you all your sins in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Spirit.” This is not a misunderstanding. By faith, we gladly take Christ at His Word. It's wonderful, isn't it? I would encourage you to re-watch the video in light of this.
I would add to Caleb's point that confession and absolution can be found in the early church long before the Roman Church Proper was founded. It's really our modern American church that has discarded the practice. We Americans need to have a serious crash course on church history
It is not a misundestanding. It is based on what the Bible really says. But the problem is: if anyone can give his own interpretation of the Bible, there cannot be unity between christians. Unity must be on Truth. In the catholic and ortodox churches there are some clear principles of interpretation of the Bible given in the first 3 centuries d.C. by the successors of the apostles. Jesus did surly give some instruction to the apostle that wasn't written in the Gosples and was transmitted orally. Protestants have eliminated the continuity of these teachings, as they eliminated the sacrament of confession and the other sacraments.They preserved just the baptism and the eucarist that has been transformed in "the holy supper" and it is no more the participation at the Holy Sacrifice of Jusus on the Cross. The pastor did not forgive you validly, becouse he doesn't have any autority to do it. Go to a catholic or to an ortodox priest, validly ordained, and he will be able to forgive your sins by the power given by Jusus himself and trsnsmitted to the sucessors of the apostles by the Sacred Ordination. God bless you.
@@calebcarlson1341 but the question is: from who did the pastor recived this autority? Jesus gave it to the apostles, not to all the members of the church. The apostles transmitted this power to their successors by the imoposition of the hands. But protestants have interrupted this succession ordaining priests on their own...how do you deal with that?
@@Outrider74 I perfectly agree with you, and the more you study the history of the church, the more you realize how much the Protestantism is distant from the christianity of the origins. Probably if you'll study more deeply you'll become catholic or ortodox.😂
So any Christian can forgive the sins? Because Jesus was giving authority to the apostles not to every Christian. Yes we ought to forgive sin against us, not to forgive other people’s sin with out authority. And also who give the authority to the pastor?
The authority can be given only by Jesus himself, becouse he is the Son of God. He gave it to the apostles. The apostles imposed their hands on their successors, transmitting to them this authority. And the same their successor did ordaining bishops and priests. But for the protestants the succession has been interrupted by Luther, so no one of the protestant pastors has the autority to forgive sins. Only catholic and ortodox christians can.
@@halo0360 For what I know lutherans consider the apostolic succession as connected with the fidelity to the Scriptures, not as something transmitted by the imposition of hands.
You confess your sins to Jesus and He Forgives You and Helps You Do Better. This is what Jesus Does! Jesus Never Said to seek a man or a church. Jesus Said to Seek Him and His Righteousness.
No doubt this will not satisfy you as you seem to have your mind made up already, but this what priests in the Eastern Orthodox Church say to people at the beginning of confession: "Behold my child, Christ standeth here invisibly, and recieveth your confession: wherefore, be not ashamed, neither be afraid and conceal thou nothing from me: but tell me, doubting not, all things which thou hast done; and so shalt thou have pardon from our Lord Jesus Christ."
+Tiago.. I do not know that church. That was very nice what you said. And I have heard a person say once that they liked to go to confession so I am happy for all those who like this. But I was born into a church that Crushed me and I have had very poor experience in Church. I Seek Jesus as He Says in Matthew 6:33 and He let's me come to Him..Myself.
@@kathleenwharton2139 I'm glad you have found peace in Jesus. That is a great blessing in this life. I'm sorry to hear you had a bad experience in the church you were born into, but I hope you're able to find a group of Christians you feel comfortable with for fellowship and support.
+ Tiago..thank you for your kind comment. I am depending on Jesus to bring me community. Jesus Said..He will Give us Everything we Need..so I am being patient..until He Does.
kathleen Wharton “But if we walk in the light, as he is in the light, we have fellowship with one another, and the blood of Jesus, his Son, purifies us from all sin.” 1 John 1:7 NIV The LORD Supper and Christ’s free gift to “take & eat...” is to have fellowship with one another in His body & blood for the forgiveness of our sins. “Is not the cup of thanksgiving for which we give thanks a participation in the blood of Christ? And is not the bread that we break a participation in the body of Christ?” 1 Corinthians 10:16 NIV Pray with me...that in the Name of GOD the Father/Son/Holy Spirit, our eyes would be opened to Satan's schemes. “Anyone you forgive, I also forgive. And what I have forgiven-if there was anything to forgive-I have forgiven in the sight of Christ for your sake, in order that Satan might not outwit us. For we are not unaware of his schemes.” 2 Corinthians 2:10-11 NIV
Many sects because your arch-heritic destroyed Christian unity. On confession : John 20:23 "and he said to them: Receive ye the Holy Ghost. [23] Whose sins you shall forgive, they are forgiven them; and whose sins you shall retain, they are retained. The confessor has no basis for retaining sins i.e withholding forgiveness, without acturally hearing the penitents confession. You word salad did not address the key issue which is ALWAYS by what authority.
@@PastorBryanWolfmueller Can you explain the need for it beyond praying for forgiveness to the Father in the name of Jesus? The verses you quote I can see Christ and his apostles doing it, but I am wondering if there is any other evidence of men doing this beyond Jesus and his apostles. I appreciate the help.
@@Gondor149no, there is no evidence. John 20:23 does not give authority to any man to forgive sins. It only gives it to his apostles onto whom Jesus breathed his Holy Spirit. Matt 9:8 talks about God the Father giving Jesus the authority to forgive sins. So it’s irrelevant. The idea that anyone can forgive sins is totally unbiblical. Only apostles and his successors can. If you do not have apostolic succession, you have no authority to forgive sins.
@@mpkropf5062 Lutherans are so interesting. They deny apostolic succession to reject papacy, they drop priesthood from the list of sacraments, but they still want to maintain that they have valid ordinations that go back to the apostles. You cannot have the cake and it too. By the way, you happen to talk to someone that teaches RCIA and has the privilege of seeing so many lost Protestants come back to the fullness of the Catholic faith.
You coming into contact with Jesus through your pastor is Catholic. The pastor being Jesus' voice on earth is Catholic. You do not find this idea anywhere in the Bible.
What an odd doctrine. And what an odd spin on John 20:23. 1. What makes Pastor Bryan so sure that the confession Jesus is referring to is sins against God, and not sins against ourselves? 2. How do we know that this was not an authority that was given to the 10 Apostles that were present at that specific moment? (There were 12 present when this authority was given in Matthew 18, but Judas Iscariot and Thomas were not there in John 20.) 3. Why did none of the Apostles actually use this authority in the Scriptures? Never did any of the Apostles after John 20 actually forgive anyone’s sins? They always pointed people to Jesus for forgiveness of sins. My point is that Luther wanted to keep a great deal of Roman-Catholic type doctrine in his state church in order to make the transition easier for German Catholics. He kept infant baptism because German Catholics wanted to baptize their babies. He spun a different understanding for why you baptized your babies, but German peasants probably didn’t understand the different reasoning. They just knew that lots of babies died very young and they wanted them in heaven. So Martin Luther made a system where German peasants would be comforted. It’s the same with absolution. These Catholics wanted their sins forgiven by a human. They wanted assurance that their sins were forgiven. Luther put it in his system to give them this assurance and comfort. He wanted a state church that had the support of the German people. But how odd that he had as part of his motto “By Scripture Alone” but created a church that did so many things that were not actually in the scripture. There is no record of the Apostles using their authority to forgive sins. There is no record of the Apostles baptizing infants. There is no record of any of this liturgy that the Lutherans use. Luther was a great man. I particularly like his 95 Theses and the Bondage of the Will. He was invaluable for the church. But the state church he created for the Germans retained way too many Catholic concepts, including the sacramental approach to the forgiveness of sins.
It seems you are anti Lutheran and anti Catholic. No denomination would exist if Luther hadn’t stepped out and reformed the Church! And Lutheran isn’t a denomination. But all those that left it started denominations and the devil is in each one! There is never any Church Service as “ Holy “ as one who holds on to the Liturgy! The Liturgy goes back to the First Century and has never changed! That’s why the Traditional Catholic Church and LSCM have the same order of the Liturgy! But the denominations are so far out! Having a bunch of songs with rock bands and one LONG Sermon was never taught! It’s because denominations it’s all about the people where in Mass and Divine Service it’s all about Jesus!! It’s a huge difference! I would not attend any service that doesn’t uphold the Liturgical Order!!Because the devil is in their services.
That verse cannot be about sins against individuals, because then it implies that if someone personally withholds forgiveness, then that sin remains unforgiven in the eyes of God.
@@bruhmingo Why not? And what sort of Christian doesn’t forgive trespasses against themselves? But maybe you’re right. Maybe it is just a special dispensation of the Holy Spirit to the Apostles. It’s certainly possible. There’s no particular scripture that relates that any of them publicly pronounced someone’s sins forgiven. They always pointed sinners to Christ for forgiveness of sins. But if they did have this “power,” there’s no evidence that anyone today has any such dispensation to remit or retain sins, other than sins against themselves. I certainly can forgive those that sin against me. And I certainly believe that sins against me that I forgive are forgiven by God as well.
In John 20,23 Jesus was speaking to the apostoles. He gave the power to forgive sins to the apostles and to their successors not to all christians. So you can forgive sins only if you receved this power by the successors of the apostoles. This is clearly conteined in the Gospel and confirmed by all the apostolic fathers in the firsts 3 centuries. For this reason it has been universally belived by both catholic and ortodox church from the first centuries until today. I want to underline that also protestants riceved the Canon of Scriptures (the books of the Bible recognised as autentic) from the father of the Church (successors of the apostols living in the first 4 centuries) but they eliminated the book of James just because it was contrary to the doctrine of justification, and they do not study the apostolic fathers becouse they are too much "compromising". Why do you eliminate all the christian tradition before Luther, by the doctrine of Sola Scriptura invented by Luther himself? I hope you can go deeper in the subject studing what the apostolic fathers used to say...like Clement the Roman (94a.c) Ignatius (about 100) etc..God bless you.
Hey, just scanned a bit of Clement, and nothing about the absolution jumped out. Do you have any references? Otherwise, I'll take a deeper look this week.
I found a little synthesis on the web... It would have been too laborious to collect all the references. You can find the link on the comment above. And sorry if I'm a little bit too "apologetic" ;-)
"...but they eliminated the book of James just because it was contrary to the doctrine of justification..." That's an interesting phrase to say the least. I have never once picked up any Bible which didn't have the book of James in it. I've visited quite a few different churches over years, been a member at a few of them, and I have never once heard any pastor anywhere discourage anyone from reading from James. In fact, a couple weeks ago I visited a PCA Presbyterian church and the text for the sermon was from, you guessed it, James. The topic? Encouraging the congregation to be doers of the word and not just hearers. This was not a one-off event either as they were in a series of sermons which all came out of James. Don't believe every bad thing you've heard about Protestants.
@@ronobvious1785 Yes, sorry, I've been a little bit impricise about the subject. The epistle of james has not been totally eliminated in the protestant canon, it has been put in the section of "apocrypha" or "prolegomena". Luter wanted to eliminate it completely from the canon, but he couldn't because his followers did not agree with him. Nevertheless from Martin Luther's point of view the epistle was supposed to be canceled from the canon: it seemed in fact to be in contraddiction with the saint Paul's theology of justification by faith. Quote: "St. John's Gospel and his first Epistle, St. Paul's Epistles, especially those to the Romans, Galatians, Ephesians, and St. Peter's Epistle-these are the books which show to thee Christ, and teach everything that is necessary and blessed for thee to know, even if you were never to see or hear any other book of doctrine. Therefore, St. James' Epistle is a perfect straw-epistle compared with them, for it has in it nothing of an evangelic kind." The doctrine of justification and the value of works have different interpretations in the protestant churches, but my perception is that there is a big confusion on the matter. Nevertheless if you want to give me some indication for a better understanding of this subject I'm all ears.
God only breathed on man twice. To give life and to give the sacrament of penance. This was given to the apostles not to the Church generally. This office is passed to the bishops. Lutheran orders are invalid. Getting hands laid on by an Anglican bishop doesn't help. You have no valid priesthood. You have no valid sacraments. Repent and come back in. In nomine Patris et Filii et Spiritus Sancti ✠✠✠
@@halo0360 The only question that matters when trying to decide a question of orthodox doctrine or practice is, “Says who?” When you start a sentence “I think etc.” the only correct response is, “Oh yeah, says you.” In Acts of the Apostles, when the eleven chose a successor to Judas they conferred his “bishoprick” (KJV) on him by the laying on of hands. Some Lutheran must have thought that getting Anglican bishops to do this would satisfy the requirement. Sorry Anglican order are, if not invalid, certainly doubtful. As to Abbots: some abbots exercise episcopal authority under some circumstances. I have been able to find canons authorizing abbots, who are themselves priests, to confer minor orders. If you can cite me an authority for abbots conferring the priesthood, I would appreciate it. Pax Domini sit semper vobiscum. ✠✠✠
@@halo0360 Basil Hume, Archbishop of Westminster While firmly restating the judgment of Apostolicae Curae that Anglican ordination is invalid, the Catholic Church takes account of the involvement, in some bishops of the Old Catholic Church of the Union of Utrecht who are validly ordained. In particular and probably rare cases the authorities in Rome may judge that there is a "prudent doubt" concerning the invalidity of priestly ordination received by an individual Anglican minister ordained in this line of succession. There are many complex factors that would require verification in each case. Of course, if there were other cases where sufficient evidence was available, the balance of that evidence may lead the authorities to reach a different judgment.[22] At the same time, he stated: Since the church must be in no doubt of the validity of the sacraments celebrated for the Catholic community, it must ask all who are chosen to exercise the priesthood in the Catholic Church to accept sacramental ordination in order to fulfill their ministry and be integrated into the apostolic succession Like I said, If not invalid then doubtful.
A few years back, I was attending an LCMS church (contemporary style/ not confessional) that offered communion every week with no confession and no absolution. Needless to say, it bothered me. We moved two years ago, went to a local LCMS congregation, and after confession, when the pastor said the words of absolution, I found myself bursting out in tears. I didn’t realize how badly I needed to hear those words. On a side note, I believe there is a direct correlation between the rise of anxiety and depression in kids and teens and young adults because they do not know what to do with their brokenness and sin. Thanks for explaining this so simply today.
Beautifully said
There is no greater joy than to have your sins forgiven.
A priest cannot forgive your sins
@@Titus2_13 hos did you come to that conclusion?
@@MrGassemann the scriptures
@@Titus2_13 how do you read John 20.23? May it be so that an ordained pastor by the grace of God can deliver the promise of forgiveness of sins?
@@MrGassemann that's talking about people forgiving each other. You must compare scripture with all other scripture. Mark 2:1-11
In my years working in restaurants, I've seen managers give free meals away. Never once have I seen a customer say, "No, only the owner of the restaurant can give out free meals!" Or "That's all well and good, but in my heart, I don't FEEL like this meal is free." People are thankful for the free meal.
Dear Christians friends, when a pastor forgives your sins in the name and by the authority of Christ Jesus, your sins are forgiven!
The scripture says if you confess your sins, HE is faithful and just to forgive your sins and cleanse you from all unrighteousness. the HE refers to christ himself. No priest needed. The scripture also says that there is ONE mediator between man and God, the person christ Jesus.
@@Titus2_13 That's not what John 20 says, though. Jesus breathed on the apostles and told them "Receive the Holy Spirit. If you forgive the sins of any, they are forgiven. If you retain the sins of any, they are retained."
@@LutheranMockingbird that's talking about people forgiving each other for personal misdeeds
@@Titus2_13 Then why would Jesus even say it? That's like saying "If you eat someone's sandwich, it is eaten," as if that were not perfectly obvious. That's meaningless. What Jesus is saying is that if we forgive the sins of the repentant, that's the same as God forgiving their sins.
@@LutheranMockingbird we have to read all of scripture in context with itself. If it looks like 1 verse contradicts all others, that means we are misinterpreting it.
That analogy of a judge and bailiff makes so much sense!
I know! I want to tell that story next time someone asks me why Catholics confess before a priest!
Great explanation of the keys.
One of the things that has actually sold me on confession and absolution (apart from what Scripture itself says) is that it's spoken about in the early church, and not only Luther, but even Calvin and John Wesley, believed in using them. Interesting to note.
I'm not expert enough about the evolution of Protestantism to say, but it seems logical to me that if you eliminate the concept of "priesthood" and of "apostolic succession" you must also eliminate the sacrament of confession as a consequence, because the mediation is no more necessary. Luther was a catholic monk before the reform, and he used to practice confession, so he maybe recognized the "human" value of the practice, even if he didn't recognize the "sacramental" value of it, but those after him gave less importance to this aspect. In my opinion there is also a problem related with the doctrine of justification: if the doctrine of justification according to Luther (correct me if I'm wrong) says that Jesus "covers" your sins by his passion and death, sins cannot be "deleted" from your soul. According to Orthodoxy and Catholicism in the process of conversion by the sacrament of penance, Jesus really cancel your sins and operate a "transformation" of your human nature, restoring it more and more at his image, so that you can participate to the same life of God himself. I therefore have a question: is all that possible in a protestant prospective? Does Baptism "cancel" or "cover" your sins? And when you ask forgiveness to God for a personal sin (without the mediation of a priest) what does actually happen?
@@thomastr914 The protestant doctrine is that "His passion and death" washes away the sin, so it "deletes." Next part: yes. Armenians and Lutherans would also include the Eucharist as part of the continual transformation process. Calvinists, Baptists hold the rememberance alone view.
Does baptism? For protestants: "Perhaps the most convincing refutation of the view that baptism is necessary for salvation are those who were saved apart from baptism. The penitent woman (Luke 7:37-50), the paralytic man (Matthew 9:2), the publican (Luke 18:13-14), and the thief on the cross (Luke 23:39-43) all experienced forgiveness of sins apart from baptism." So no the sincere spiritual profession of faith in the redemptive power of Jesus Christ and His sacrifice cancel the Heavenly consequences of sin; baptism is the physical act to demonstrate commitment, and done if possible. If one asks AND repents (strives as best as possible and then a little more umph, to not sin again), it is forgiven the same as priest or pastor or fellow member of the church for the investment of power is the Holy Spirit that dwells within: 1 Corinthians 6:19 " What? know ye not that your body is the temple of the Holy Ghost which is in you, which ye have of God, and ye are not your own?". Prior to around 300 AD when Emperor Constantine ceased the persecution of Christians and made it legal, churches were small gatherings in peoples homes (which were tiny by modern american standards), and confessions were oft done before the entire body of those gathered.
Back to the beginning: eliminating the priesthood: no, the investure is from the Holy Spirit, few chose to study the Word thoroughly enough to act as shepards (pastors) of the populace. Most protestants groups still have deacons, priests/pastors and bishops.
eliminating apostolic succession: varies; on the yes it ended side it would be the Apostles were those directly invested by the risen Christ with power, power of tongues, miracles, etc. and the Aposolitic status ended with them with those afterwards being only capable of being apostles and not Apostles. on the other side (no, it didn't end) goes with Rome, the capital of the western pagan world got its tendrils into power structure of the Vatican, wormed its way in and up, taking focus away from the direct words left to us by the Apostles. And when the Word was used to question the actions of the Roman Church, especially its authority, the authority by decree (Trent) declared anathema (ie to be damned to hell which in the physical world to be exiled or killed) those who questioned the authority of the Vatican, the magisterium even if the questions were sincere using the Word nor was peaceful discourse permitted. So the traditional protestant view is the apostolic succession continues, but not from the Vatican, and in humility and the reverence toward the Apostles, the terminology fell out of usage.
You receive a peace you don’t receive outside of confession for those who don’t believe never get to experience it!
As a Catholic I have learned so many powerful ways to understand and talk about biblical, historical, liturgical practice in our Christian walk. I have also learned so much about Lutheranism and how the Holy Spirit moves throughout the whole catholic church! Honestly I have never , ever heard a protestant talk about the faith without it just being a chain of scriptures held together by personal feeling or American cultural norms and ideas. I never heard a protestant talk about history at all and you have opened my eyes. God bless and thanks Pastor!
Amen and thanks be to God
Thank you for making this mystery plain.
Amazing explanation thank you so much Pastor
First time I’ve watched this channel. I like that kneeler over there in the back
Thank you for your videos.
pairing forgiveness with suffering is helpful
This is awesome. The only caveat I would add is that i only see priests (pastors in your context) as having apostolic authority to pronounce absolution. But otherwise we are in full agreement here. Pretty awesome brother
Confession and absolution are necessary regularly, because despite popular opinion, future sins are not washed away at your baptism nor are they washed away because of a prayer one said years ago hiring an altar call.
For any denomination that calls it the “ altar call” and they have no altar and the Pastor stands there it looks like they are praying to the Pastor!! When they really don’t understand what an altar is!
They say the same with Baptism (as real and effectual mean of grace) and Holly Communion (as real and effectual mean of grace). They (evangelicals) say ''What? That's so Eastern Orthodox!''
Should add the sacrament of Penance! Lutheran used to have 3 sacraments long ago
We still do. Lutherans without equivocation teach that Holy Absolution is the true word of God to the absolved. Augsburg Defense XIII: _Of the Number and Use of the Sacraments_ says, "Therefore Baptism, the Lord’s Supper, and Absolution, which is the Sacrament of Repentance, are truly Sacraments."
I don’t say I forgive you because it feels condescending. Saying no big deal allows them to ease their conscience.
Hi Pastor Bryan. Do you think Kerri will forgive me for missing Choir Practice.
If I sin against you, why tell a priest? It's not his sin to forgive. I should confess to you and ask you for absolution.
Hey Pastor Wolfmueller, how do you respond to people when they say that John chapter 20 is talking about personal forgiveness between one another for sins against each other (like Eph 4:32) and not the pastor on behalf of God (Baptists like to use this one)?
You know Baptists have a messed up doctrine! Especially on baptisms and the Eucharist!
Hi guys - quick question. Does anyone know why the LCMS believes (as Bryan mentions in the video) that the pastors especially have authority to forgive sins/offer absolution. Obviously in the Catholic faith it is believed that the priests and bishops are the direct heirs (in an unbroken line) to the power bestowed upon the apostles by Christ to forgive sins. Do LCMS pastors also believe their ordination bestows a special type of grace or authority? And for what reason? Would LOVE it if someone could answer this burning question!
All Christians have the authority to forgive sins, not just pastors. Sorry if that was not clear
@@PastorBryanWolfmueller Thank you pastor! Sorry, from the video I thought perhaps pastors had a special authority in that realm according to LCMS doctrine. God bless you and the work you do - you're my Sunday sermon (I go to church, but the denominations here are all "Church of Nice" and don't challenge me spiritually.
The idea that every Christian has the authority to forgive sins is simply ridiculous and totally unbiblical.
In John 20:23, Jesus is not preaching to the masses. He is breathing his Holy Spirit into his Apostles and to them only he is giving this authority.
If you do not have apostolic succession, you do not have authority to forgive sins. No self proclaimed pastor has any authority to forgive sins.
The idea the I myself, as a Christian, can go around and forgive (or not forgive!) people randomly and God is bound by my declarations is unreal.
Using Pastor’s analogy, it is as if that judge gave everyone in the city the power to go and unlock the prison cells of whoever they want to free and to keep locked the cells of whoever they do not want to free.
Total anarchy and madness.
The sacrament of confession is a serious sacrament and needs to be administered by those appointed by Jesus to speak in his name, in persona Christi.
@@thejerichoconnection3473 Confessional Lutheran pastors are in succession to the Holy Apostles.
@@B27-o2c of course they are not, because they were not validly ordained. Lutherans reject Holy Orders as a sacrament. Lutherans believe that anyone can be a pastor as long as he is called to be one by a congregation. This is not how it has ever worked in the Church from day one. Luther invented this framework out of the blue because he didn’t have any other possibility if he wanted to build his church outside of the Catholic Church.
question- is the general declaration of forgiveness/absolution in service required for a person to be forgiven? In other words- are we not forgiven daily in our private time of confessing to God until we officially hear the words of absolution from the pastor on Sunday? Or is the corporate absolution just one way we can receive God's forgiveness?
Forgiveness is given in abundance by God. Corporate absolution is merely one way to hear the promise, and is meant to only bring comfort to the troubled conscience.
Lutheran priests think they can forgive my sins. This is a misunderstanding of MT. 16:18 and 18:18. Christ was talking to Jews who understood perfectly what He was talking about.
Jack Tyrell, brother, don’t forget about John 20:19-23. Jesus quite clearly teaches here that He gives special authority to His church on earth to forgive the sins of repentant sinners, and withhold forgiveness from the unrepentant, as long as they do not repent. This is to be understood as if it is from Christ Himself (because it is). It is from His divine command.
From the liturgy, the pastor, proceeding the confession, says, “Upon this your confession I, by virtue of my office, as a called and ordained servant of the Word, announce the grace of God unto all of you, and in the stead and by the command of my Lord Jesus Christ I forgive you all your sins in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Spirit.”
This is not a misunderstanding. By faith, we gladly take Christ at His Word. It's wonderful, isn't it? I would encourage you to re-watch the video in light of this.
I would add to Caleb's point that confession and absolution can be found in the early church long before the Roman Church Proper was founded. It's really our modern American church that has discarded the practice. We Americans need to have a serious crash course on church history
It is not a misundestanding. It is based on what the Bible really says. But the problem is: if anyone can give his own interpretation of the Bible, there cannot be unity between christians. Unity must be on Truth. In the catholic and ortodox churches there are some clear principles of interpretation of the Bible given in the first 3 centuries d.C. by the successors of the apostles. Jesus did surly give some instruction to the apostle that wasn't written in the Gosples and was transmitted orally. Protestants have eliminated the continuity of these teachings, as they eliminated the sacrament of confession and the other sacraments.They preserved just the baptism and the eucarist that has been transformed in "the holy supper" and it is no more the participation at the Holy Sacrifice of Jusus on the Cross. The pastor did not forgive you validly, becouse he doesn't have any autority to do it. Go to a catholic or to an ortodox priest, validly ordained, and he will be able to forgive your sins by the power given by Jusus himself and trsnsmitted to the sucessors of the apostles by the Sacred Ordination. God bless you.
@@calebcarlson1341 but the question is: from who did the pastor recived this autority? Jesus gave it to the apostles, not to all the members of the church. The apostles transmitted this power to their successors by the imoposition of the hands. But protestants have interrupted this succession ordaining priests on their own...how do you deal with that?
@@Outrider74 I perfectly agree with you, and the more you study the history of the church, the more you realize how much the Protestantism is distant from the christianity of the origins. Probably if you'll study more deeply you'll become catholic or ortodox.😂
I got a idea bring a cardboard box with a curtain to your Pastor. Too Catholic
Lol There’s nothing wrong with being “ too Catholic!” It’s people who have attitude issues against them.
So any Christian can forgive the sins? Because Jesus was giving authority to the apostles not to every Christian. Yes we ought to forgive sin against us, not to forgive other people’s sin with out authority.
And also who give the authority to the pastor?
The authority can be given only by Jesus himself, becouse he is the Son of God. He gave it to the apostles. The apostles imposed their hands on their successors, transmitting to them this authority. And the same their successor did ordaining bishops and priests. But for the protestants the succession has been interrupted by Luther, so no one of the protestant pastors has the autority to forgive sins. Only catholic and ortodox christians can.
@@halo0360 For what I know lutherans consider the apostolic succession as connected with the fidelity to the Scriptures, not as something transmitted by the imposition of hands.
@@halo0360 That's interesting. I'll take a look.
You confess your sins to Jesus and He Forgives You and Helps You Do Better. This is what Jesus Does! Jesus Never Said to seek a man or a church. Jesus Said to Seek Him and His Righteousness.
No doubt this will not satisfy you as you seem to have your mind made up already, but this what priests in the Eastern Orthodox Church say to people at the beginning of confession: "Behold my child, Christ standeth here invisibly, and recieveth your confession: wherefore, be not ashamed, neither be afraid and conceal thou nothing from me: but tell me, doubting not, all things which thou hast done; and so shalt thou have pardon from our Lord Jesus Christ."
+Tiago.. I do not know that church. That was very nice what you said. And I have heard a person say once that they liked to go to confession so I am happy for all those who like this. But I was born into a church that Crushed me and I have had very poor experience in Church. I Seek Jesus as He Says in Matthew 6:33 and He let's me come to Him..Myself.
@@kathleenwharton2139 I'm glad you have found peace in Jesus. That is a great blessing in this life. I'm sorry to hear you had a bad experience in the church you were born into, but I hope you're able to find a group of Christians you feel comfortable with for fellowship and support.
+ Tiago..thank you for your kind comment. I am depending on Jesus to bring me community. Jesus Said..He will Give us Everything we Need..so I am being patient..until He Does.
kathleen Wharton “But if we walk in the light, as he is in the light, we have fellowship with one another, and the blood of Jesus, his Son, purifies us from all sin.”
1 John 1:7 NIV
The LORD Supper and Christ’s free gift to “take & eat...” is to have fellowship with one another in His body & blood for the forgiveness of our sins.
“Is not the cup of thanksgiving for which we give thanks a participation in the blood of Christ? And is not the bread that we break a participation in the body of Christ?”
1 Corinthians 10:16 NIV
Pray with me...that in the Name of GOD the Father/Son/Holy Spirit, our eyes would be opened to Satan's schemes.
“Anyone you forgive, I also forgive. And what I have forgiven-if there was anything to forgive-I have forgiven in the sight of Christ for your sake, in order that Satan might not outwit us. For we are not unaware of his schemes.”
2 Corinthians 2:10-11 NIV
Many sects because your arch-heritic destroyed Christian unity. On confession : John 20:23 "and he said to them: Receive ye the Holy Ghost. [23] Whose sins you shall forgive, they are forgiven them; and whose sins you shall retain, they are retained. The confessor has no basis for retaining sins i.e withholding forgiveness, without acturally hearing the penitents confession. You word salad did not address the key issue which is ALWAYS by what authority.
Lutheran claim to be scripture alone,where in a bible does it say a man can forgive another man's sins
John 20:23, Matthew 9:8
@@PastorBryanWolfmueller Can you explain the need for it beyond praying for forgiveness to the Father in the name of Jesus? The verses you quote I can see Christ and his apostles doing it, but I am wondering if there is any other evidence of men doing this beyond Jesus and his apostles. I appreciate the help.
@@Gondor149no, there is no evidence.
John 20:23 does not give authority to any man to forgive sins. It only gives it to his apostles onto whom Jesus breathed his Holy Spirit.
Matt 9:8 talks about God the Father giving Jesus the authority to forgive sins. So it’s irrelevant.
The idea that anyone can forgive sins is totally unbiblical. Only apostles and his successors can.
If you do not have apostolic succession, you have no authority to forgive sins.
@@mpkropf5062 no they don’t, because they don’t have valid orders and reject apostolic succession.
@@mpkropf5062 Lutherans are so interesting. They deny apostolic succession to reject papacy, they drop priesthood from the list of sacraments, but they still want to maintain that they have valid ordinations that go back to the apostles. You cannot have the cake and it too.
By the way, you happen to talk to someone that teaches RCIA and has the privilege of seeing so many lost Protestants come back to the fullness of the Catholic faith.
You coming into contact with Jesus through your pastor is Catholic. The pastor being Jesus' voice on earth is Catholic. You do not find this idea anywhere in the Bible.
It’s everywhere in the new testament.
@@bruhmingo No it is not. You must be blind.
What an odd doctrine. And what an odd spin on John 20:23. 1. What makes Pastor Bryan so sure that the confession Jesus is referring to is sins against God, and not sins against ourselves? 2. How do we know that this was not an authority that was given to the 10 Apostles that were present at that specific moment? (There were 12 present when this authority was given in Matthew 18, but Judas Iscariot and Thomas were not there in John 20.) 3. Why did none of the Apostles actually use this authority in the Scriptures? Never did any of the Apostles after John 20 actually forgive anyone’s sins? They always pointed people to Jesus for forgiveness of sins. My point is that Luther wanted to keep a great deal of Roman-Catholic type doctrine in his state church in order to make the transition easier for German Catholics. He kept infant baptism because German Catholics wanted to baptize their babies. He spun a different understanding for why you baptized your babies, but German peasants probably didn’t understand the different reasoning. They just knew that lots of babies died very young and they wanted them in heaven. So Martin Luther made a system where German peasants would be comforted. It’s the same with absolution. These Catholics wanted their sins forgiven by a human. They wanted assurance that their sins were forgiven. Luther put it in his system to give them this assurance and comfort. He wanted a state church that had the support of the German people. But how odd that he had as part of his motto “By Scripture Alone” but created a church that did so many things that were not actually in the scripture. There is no record of the Apostles using their authority to forgive sins. There is no record of the Apostles baptizing infants. There is no record of any of this liturgy that the Lutherans use. Luther was a great man. I particularly like his 95 Theses and the Bondage of the Will. He was invaluable for the church. But the state church he created for the Germans retained way too many Catholic concepts, including the sacramental approach to the forgiveness of sins.
It seems you are anti Lutheran and anti Catholic. No denomination would exist if Luther hadn’t stepped out and reformed the Church! And Lutheran isn’t a denomination. But all those that left it started denominations and the devil is in each one! There is never any Church Service as “ Holy “ as one who holds on to the Liturgy! The Liturgy goes back to the First Century and has never changed! That’s why the Traditional Catholic Church and LSCM have the same order of the Liturgy! But the denominations are so far out! Having a bunch of songs with rock bands and one LONG Sermon was never taught! It’s because denominations it’s all about the people where in Mass and Divine Service it’s all about Jesus!! It’s a huge difference! I would not attend any service that doesn’t uphold the Liturgical Order!!Because the devil is in their services.
That verse cannot be about sins against individuals, because then it implies that if someone personally withholds forgiveness, then that sin remains unforgiven in the eyes of God.
@@bruhmingo Why not? And what sort of Christian doesn’t forgive trespasses against themselves? But maybe you’re right. Maybe it is just a special dispensation of the Holy Spirit to the Apostles. It’s certainly possible. There’s no particular scripture that relates that any of them publicly pronounced someone’s sins forgiven. They always pointed sinners to Christ for forgiveness of sins. But if they did have this “power,” there’s no evidence that anyone today has any such dispensation to remit or retain sins, other than sins against themselves. I certainly can forgive those that sin against me. And I certainly believe that sins against me that I forgive are forgiven by God as well.
In John 20,23 Jesus was speaking to the apostoles. He gave the power to forgive sins to the apostles and to their successors not to all christians. So you can forgive sins only if you receved this power by the successors of the apostoles. This is clearly conteined in the Gospel and confirmed by all the apostolic fathers in the firsts 3 centuries. For this reason it has been universally belived by both catholic and ortodox church from the first centuries until today. I want to underline that also protestants riceved the Canon of Scriptures (the books of the Bible recognised as autentic) from the father of the Church (successors of the apostols living in the first 4 centuries) but they eliminated the book of James just because it was contrary to the doctrine of justification, and they do not study the apostolic fathers becouse they are too much "compromising". Why do you eliminate all the christian tradition before Luther, by the doctrine of Sola Scriptura invented by Luther himself? I hope you can go deeper in the subject studing what the apostolic fathers used to say...like Clement the Roman (94a.c) Ignatius (about 100) etc..God bless you.
Hey, just scanned a bit of Clement, and nothing about the absolution jumped out. Do you have any references? Otherwise, I'll take a deeper look this week.
Ok, I'll do it as soon as possible...thank you for your attention! Have a good sunday!
I found a little synthesis on the web... It would have been too laborious to collect all the references. You can find the link on the comment above. And sorry if I'm a little bit too "apologetic" ;-)
"...but they eliminated the book of James just because it was contrary to the doctrine of justification..." That's an interesting phrase to say the least. I have never once picked up any Bible which didn't have the book of James in it. I've visited quite a few different churches over years, been a member at a few of them, and I have never once heard any pastor anywhere discourage anyone from reading from James. In fact, a couple weeks ago I visited a PCA Presbyterian church and the text for the sermon was from, you guessed it, James. The topic? Encouraging the congregation to be doers of the word and not just hearers. This was not a one-off event either as they were in a series of sermons which all came out of James. Don't believe every bad thing you've heard about Protestants.
@@ronobvious1785 Yes, sorry, I've been a little bit impricise about the subject. The epistle of james has not been totally eliminated in the protestant canon, it has been put in the section of "apocrypha" or "prolegomena". Luter wanted to eliminate it completely from the canon, but he couldn't because his followers did not agree with him. Nevertheless from Martin Luther's point of view the epistle was supposed to be canceled from the canon: it seemed in fact to be in contraddiction with the saint Paul's theology of justification by faith.
Quote: "St. John's Gospel and his first Epistle, St. Paul's Epistles, especially those to the Romans, Galatians, Ephesians, and St. Peter's Epistle-these are the books which show to thee Christ, and teach everything that is necessary and blessed for thee to know, even if you were never to see or hear any other book of doctrine. Therefore, St. James' Epistle is a perfect straw-epistle compared with them, for it has in it nothing of an evangelic kind."
The doctrine of justification and the value of works have different interpretations in the protestant churches, but my perception is that there is a big confusion on the matter. Nevertheless if you want to give me some indication for a better understanding of this subject I'm all ears.
God only breathed on man twice. To give life and to give the sacrament of penance. This was given to the apostles not to the Church generally. This office is passed to the bishops. Lutheran orders are invalid. Getting hands laid on by an Anglican bishop doesn't help. You have no valid priesthood. You have no valid sacraments. Repent and come back in. In nomine Patris et Filii et Spiritus Sancti ✠✠✠
@@halo0360 The only question that matters when trying to decide a question of orthodox doctrine or practice is, “Says who?” When you start a sentence “I think etc.” the only correct response is, “Oh yeah, says you.” In Acts of the Apostles, when the eleven chose a successor to Judas they conferred his “bishoprick” (KJV) on him by the laying on of hands. Some Lutheran must have thought that getting Anglican bishops to do this would satisfy the requirement. Sorry Anglican order are, if not invalid, certainly doubtful. As to Abbots: some abbots exercise episcopal authority under some circumstances. I have been able to find canons authorizing abbots, who are themselves priests, to confer minor orders. If you can cite me an authority for abbots conferring the priesthood, I would appreciate it. Pax Domini sit semper vobiscum. ✠✠✠
@@halo0360 Thanks
@@halo0360 Interesting. I hadn't heard that. I will look into this and the other claim.
@@halo0360 The abstract only mentions minor orders.
@@halo0360 Basil Hume, Archbishop of Westminster
While firmly restating the judgment of Apostolicae Curae that Anglican ordination is invalid, the Catholic Church takes account of the involvement, in some bishops of the Old Catholic Church of the Union of Utrecht who are validly ordained. In particular and probably rare cases the authorities in Rome may judge that there is a "prudent doubt" concerning the invalidity of priestly ordination received by an individual Anglican minister ordained in this line of succession. There are many complex factors that would require verification in each case. Of course, if there were other cases where sufficient evidence was available, the balance of that evidence may lead the authorities to reach a different judgment.[22]
At the same time, he stated:
Since the church must be in no doubt of the validity of the sacraments celebrated for the Catholic community, it must ask all who are chosen to exercise the priesthood in the Catholic Church to accept sacramental ordination in order to fulfill their ministry and be integrated into the apostolic succession Like I said, If not invalid then doubtful.