Keep Factually independent
Whether you agree or disagree with our analysis, these conversations matter for democracy. We don't take money from political groups - even a $5 donation helps us keep it that way.
What is the biblical meaning of 'binding and loosing' and how is it applied to priests?
Executive summary
“Binding and loosing” in the Gospels is a Jewish idiom meaning to forbid (bind) or permit (loose) and is used by Matthew in two key sayings Jesus addresses first to Peter (Matthew 16:19) and then to the apostles (Matthew 18:18); many scholars and traditions read this as authority to make community decisions that God will ratify (see Jewish roots and New Testament uses) [1] [2] [3]. How that authority was institutionalized differs sharply: Roman Catholic writers tie it to Peter and the ordained priesthood (including papal succession), while Protestant and charismatic writers emphasize apostolic or congregational application and sometimes spiritual warfare uses — the sources document all three lines of interpretation and debate [4] [2] [5] [6].
1. What the phrase meant in first‑century Jewish life — legal and communal language
Jewish rabbinic practice used “bind” and “loose” as routine technical language for prohibiting or permitting behavior under the Law; rabbis could “bind” an action (declare it forbidden) or “loose” it (permit it) as part of interpreting Torah and setting community norms, and that lexical background is the primary context for Jesus’ words in Matthew [1] [7] [2].
2. How the Gospels use the phrase — authority and confirmation from heaven
Matthew records Jesus telling Peter he will receive “the keys of the kingdom” and that “whatever you bind on earth will be bound in heaven… whatever you loose on earth will be loosed in heaven,” language many commentators read as granting authoritative decision‑making in the church that heaven will endorse; the same verb pairing appears again when authority is extended to the apostolic group [1] [3] [5].
3. Early Christian and scriptural practice — examples of binding/loosing in action
New Testament episodes often cited as examples include the Jerusalem Council’s legislative decision on Gentile observance (Acts 15) and Paul’s disciplinary actions (1 Corinthians 5; 2 Corinthians 2), where apostles made communal judgments that effectively “bound” or “loosed” members in practice — a model for the phrase’s application in church governance [5] [8].
4. Catholic institutional reading — keys, Peter, and the priesthood
Catholic teaching and apologetics argue the phrase undergirds ecclesial authority: Peter’s reception of the “keys” is linked to the power to make binding decisions for the people of God, and later Catholic theology situates that authority in the apostolic‑successor structure (bishops, popes) and the ordained priesthood — applied to admitting/excluding from communion and to sacramental/disciplinary acts [4] [9] [10].
5. Protestant and broader Christian readings — apostles, the church, and the believer’s role
Protestant commentators typically stress the apostolic origin of the authority (the first apostles guided by the Spirit) and diverge on whether that power continues in the institutional priesthood or more broadly in the church and even the “priesthood of all believers”; some Protestant evangelicals read the passages as legislative for the church, others as authorizing proclamation and discipline rather than a clerical monopoly [5] [11] [12].
6. Charismatic and deliverance uses — spiritual warfare interpretation and controversies
A significant contemporary current interprets “binding and loosing” as authority over demonic activity — binding Satan or spirits and loosing people from bondage — but many mainstream scholars and denominations argue the Matthean contexts concern church discipline, not ritual exorcism, and caution against conflating the phrases with private spiritual warfare practices [6] [13] [14].
7. Historical evolution — from rabbinic idiom to medieval institution
Over centuries the phrase shifted from a rabbinic legal idiom to an institutional tool: medieval church practice formalized binding/loosing into ecclesiastical discipline, excommunication, and sacramental jurisdiction, narrowing the locus of authority to bishops and priests; the Reformation reopened debate, with Luther and others reframing the concept in light of differing views of ministry and the believer’s authority [12] [8] [15].
8. Where sources disagree or leave gaps
Sources disagree on whether binding/loosing should be read primarily as (a) legislative church authority ratified by heaven, (b) representative apostolic acts limited to the first apostles or their institutional successors, or (c) a supernatural mandate to command spiritual forces; available sources document each view but do not produce a single, uncontested conclusion and do not settle modern denominational claims about precisely who may exercise the power today [2] [4] [6].
9. Practical implication for priests and church leaders
Across Catholic, Orthodox, Protestant and charismatic streams, the consistent practical thread is that “binding and loosing” has been invoked to justify authoritative decisions about membership, discipline, forgiveness/retention of sins, and sometimes exorcism — but the scope and mechanism (ordained priests, episcopal authority, apostolic college, or local congregation/believers) depend entirely on each tradition’s reading of Matthew and its ecclesiology [9] [11] [13].
Final note: if you want a focused comparison of how two specific traditions (e.g., Roman Catholic vs. Pentecostal) apply binding and loosing today, tell me which traditions and I will prepare a side‑by‑side summary drawing only from the sources above (not found in current reporting: denominational canon law texts beyond the cited summaries).