Dear soul, it is a joy to write to you again. This month's "decade" from Evagrius is laid out plainly; we have a number of brief but piercing observations which warn us again spiritual delusion and keep us on the right way as we live the life of prayer. 

In these, I think that anything I might add would simply be superfluous weight to the Evagrian instructions. So let us simply read the following intently and vigilantly. When you and I next meet, we might have some questions or considerations we might share. Or we may not, too. Such is the life of prayer. 

Let us hear Evagrius:

111. Another saint living the hesychastic life in the desert was attacked, as he was praying, by demons who for two weeks tossed him like a ball in the air, catching him in his rush-mat. They were completely unsuccessful in distracting his mind from fiery prayer.

112. When another monk was practicing inner prayer as he journeyed in the desert, two angels came and walked on either side of him. But he paid no heed to them, for he did not wish to lose what was better. He remembered the words of the Apostle: "Neither angels, nor principalities, nor powers... shall be able to separate us from the love of Christ." (Rom. 8:38-39).

113. The monk becomes equal to the angels through prayer, because of his longing to "behold the face of the Father who is in heaven." (cf. Matt. 18:10).

114. Never try to see a form or shape during prayer.

115. Do not long to have a sensory image of angels or powers or Christ, for this would be madness: it would be to take a wolf as your shepherd and to worship your enemies, the demons.

116. Self-esteem is the start of illusions in the intellect. Under its impulse, the intellect attempts to enclose the Deity in shapes and forms.

117. I shall say again what I have said elsewhere: blessed is the intellect that is completely free from forms during prayer.

118. Blessed is the intellect that, undistracted in its prayer, acquires an ever greater longing for God.

119. Blessed is the intellect that during prayer is free from materiality and stripped of all possessions.

120. Blessed is the intellect that has acquired complete freedom from sensations during prayer.

All pardon for sins ultimately comes from Christ’s finished work on Calvary, but how is this pardon received by individuals? Did Christ leave us any means within the Church to take away sin? The Bible says he gave us two means.

Baptism was given to take away the sin inherited from Adam (original sin) and any sins we personally committed before baptism—sins we personally commit are called actual sins, because they come from our own acts. Thus on the day of Pentecost, Peter told the crowds, "Repent, Peter said to them, and be baptized, every one of you, in the name of Jesus Christ, to have your sins forgiven; then you will receive the gift of the Holy Spirit." (Acts 2:38), and when Paul was baptized he was told, "And now why tarriest thou? Rise up, and be baptized, and wash away thy sins, invoking his name." (Acts 22:16). And so Peter later wrote, "Whereunto baptism.....now saveth you also: not the putting away of the filth of the flesh, but the examination of a good conscience towards God by the resurrection of Jesus Christ." (1 Peter 3:21).

For sins committed after baptism, a different sacrament is needed. It has been called penance, confession, and repentance. and some have even called it reconciliation, each word emphasizing one of its aspects. During his life, Christ forgave sins, as in the case of the woman caught in adultery (John 8:1–11) and the woman who anointed his feet (Luke 7:48). He exercised this power in his human capacity as the Messiah or Son of man, telling us, "the Son of man hath power on earth to forgive sins," (Matthew 9:6), which is why the Gospel writer himself explains that God "had given such power to men" (Matthew 9:8).

Since he would not always be with the Church visibly, Christ gave this power to other men so the Church, which is the continuation of his presence throughout time (Matthew 28:20), would be able to offer forgiveness to future generations. He gave his power to the apostles, and it was a power that could be passed on to their successors and agents, since the apostles wouldn’t always be on earth either, but people would still be sinning.

God had sent Jesus to forgive sins, but after his resurrection Jesus told the apostles, "He said therefore to them again: Peace be to you. As the Father hath sent me, I also send you. When he had said this, he breathed on them; and he said to them: Receive ye the Holy Ghost. Whose sins you shall forgive, they are forgiven them; and whose sins you shall retain, they are retained." (John 20:21–23).

The Commission

Christ told the apostles to follow his example: "As the Father hath sent me, I also send you." (John 20:21). Just as the apostles were to carry Christ’s message to the whole world, so they were to carry his forgiveness: "Amen I say to you, whatsoever you shall bind upon earth, shall be bound also in heaven; and whatsoever you shall loose upon earth, shall be loosed also in heaven." (Matthew 18:18).

This power was understood as coming from God: "But all things are of God, who hath reconciled us to himself by Christ; and hath given to us the ministry of reconciliation." (2 Corinthians 5:18). Indeed, confirms Paul, "We are Christ’s ambassadors" (2 Corinthians 5:20).

Some say that any power given to the apostles died with them. Not so. Some powers must have, such as the ability to write Scripture. But the powers necessary to maintain the Church as a living, spiritual society had to be passed down from generation to generation. If they ceased, the Church would cease, except as a quaint abstraction. Christ ordered the apostles to, "Going therefore, making disciples of all nations." It would take much time. And he promised them assistance: "behold I am with you all through the days that are coming, until the consummation of the world." (Matthew 28:19–20).

If the disciples believed that Christ instituted the power to sacramentally forgive sins in his stead, we would expect the apostles’ successors—the bishops—and Christians of later years to act as though such power was legitimately and habitually exercised. If, on the other hand, the sacramental forgiveness of sins was what Fundamentalists term it, an "invention," and if it was something foisted upon the young Church by ecclesiastical or political leaders, we’d expect to find records of protest. In fact, in early Christian writings we find no sign of protests concerning sacramental forgiveness of sins. Quite the contrary. We find confessing to a priest was accepted as part of the original deposit of faith handed down from the apostles.

The Fourth Lateran Council discussed confession. To combat the lax morals of the time, the council regulated the already-existing duty to confess one’s sins by saying that Catholics should confess any mortal sins at least once a year. The sacrament of confession was not "invented" at this time as some would say, but they took to issue an official decree about how frequently a sacrament must be celebrated.

The earliest Christian writings, such as the first-century Didache, are indefinite on the procedure for confession to be used in the forgiveness of sins, but a verbal confession is listed as part of the Church’s requirement by the time of Irenaeus (A.D. 180). He wrote that the disciples of the Gnostic heretic Marcus "have deluded many women. . . . Their consciences have been branded as with a hot iron. Some of these women make a public confession, but others are ashamed to do this, and in silence, as if withdrawing themselves from the hope of the life of God, they either apostatize entirely or hesitate between the two courses" (Against Heresies 1:22).

The sacrament of penance is clearly in use, for Irenaeus speaks of making an outward confession (versus remaining silent) upon which the hope of eternal life hangs, but it is not yet clear from Irenaeus just how, or to whom, confession is to be made. Is it privately, to the priest, or before the whole congregation, with the priest presiding? The one thing we can say for sure is that the sacrament is understood by Irenaeus as having originated in the infant Church.

Later writers, such as Origen (241), Cyprian (251), and Aphraates (337), are clear in saying confession is to be made to a priest. (In their writings the whole process of penance is termedexomologesis, which means confession—the confession was seen as the main part of the sacrament.) Cyprian writes that the forgiveness of sins can take place only "through the priests." Ambrose says "this right is given to priests only." Pope Leo I says absolution can be obtained only through the prayers of the priests. These utterances are not taken as novel, but as reminders of accepted belief. We have no record of anyone objecting, of anyone claiming these men were pushing an "invention."

Confession Implied

Note that the power Christ gave the apostles was twofold: to forgive sins or to hold them bound, which means to retain them unforgiven. Several things follow from this. First, the apostles could not know what sins to forgive and what not to forgive unless they were first told the sins by the sinner. This implies confession. Second, their authority was not merely to proclaim that God had already forgiven sins or that he would forgive sins if there were proper repentance.

Such interpretations don’t account for the distinction between forgiving and retaining—nor do they account for the importance given to the utterance in John 20:21–23. If God has already forgiven all of a man’s sins, or will forgive them all (past and future) upon a single act of repentance, then it makes little sense to tell the apostles they have been given the power to "retain" sins, since forgiveness would be all-or-nothing and nothing could be "retained."

Furthermore, if at conversion we were forgiven all sins, past, present, and future, it would make no sense for Christ to require us to pray, "forgive us our debts, as we also forgive our debtors," which he explained is required because "if you will forgive men their offences, your heavenly Father will forgive you also your offences. But if you will not forgive men, neither will your Father forgive you your offences." (Matthew 6:12–15).

If forgiveness really can be partial—not a once-for-all thing—how is one to tell which sins have been forgiven, which not, in the absence of a priestly decision? You can’t very well rely on your own gut feelings. No, the biblical passages make sense only if the apostles and their successors were given a real authority.

Still, some people are not convinced. One is Paul Juris, a former priest, now a Fundamentalist, who has written a pamphlet on this subject. The pamphlet is widely distributed by organizations opposed to Catholicism. The cover describes the work as "a study of John 20:23, a much misunderstood and misused portion of Scripture pertaining to the forgiveness of sins." Juris mentions "two main schools of thought," the Catholic and the Fundamentalist positions.

He correctly notes that "among Christians, it is generally agreed that regular confession of one’s sins is obviously necessary to remain in good relationship with God. So the issue is not whether we should or should not confess our sins. Rather, the real issue is, How does God say that our sins are forgiven or retained?"

Verse Slinging

This sounds fine, on the surface, but this apparently reasonable approach masks what really happens next. Juris engages in verse slinging, listing as many verses as he can find that refer to God forgiving sins, in hopes that the sheer mass of verses will settle the question. But none of the verses he lists specifically interprets John 20:23, and none contradicts the Catholic interpretation.

For instance, he cites verses like these: "Be it known therefore to you, men, brethren, that through him forgiveness of sins is preached to you: and from all the things, from which you could not be justified by the law of Moses. In him every one that believeth, is justified." (Acts 13:38–39); "And he said to them: Go ye into the whole world, and preach the gospel to every creature. He that believeth and is baptized, shall be saved: but he that believeth not shall be condemned." (Mark 16:15–16).

Juris says that verses like these demonstrate that "all that was left for the disciples to do was to ‘go’ and ‘proclaim’ this wonderful good news (the gospel) to all men. As they proclaimed this good news of the gospel, those who believed the gospel, their sins would be forgiven. Those who rejected (did not believe) the gospel, their sins would be retained." Juris does nothing more than show that the Bible says God will forgive sins and that it is through Jesus that our sins are forgiven—things no one doubts. He does not remotely prove that John 20:23is equivalent to a command to "go" and to "preach," merely that going and preaching are part of God’s plan for saving people. He also sidesteps the evident problems in the Fundamentalist interpretation.

The passage says nothing about preaching the good news. Instead, Jesus is telling the apostles that they have been empowered to do something. He does not say, "When God forgives men’s sins, they are forgiven." He uses the second person plural: "you." And he talks about the apostles forgiving, not preaching. When he refers to retaining sins, he uses the same form: "When you hold them bound, they are held bound."

The best Juris can do is assert that John 20:23 means the apostles were given authority only to proclaim the forgiveness of sins—but asserting this is not proving it.

His is a technique that often works because many readers believe that the Fundamentalist interpretation has been proven true. After all, if you propose to interpret one verse and accomplish that by listing irrelevant verses that refer to something other than the specific point in controversy, lazy readers will conclude that you have marshalled an impressive array of evidence. All they have to do is count the citations. Here’s one for the Catholics, they say, looking at John 20:21–23, but ten or twenty for the Fundamentalists. The Fundamentalists must be right!

The Advantages

Is the Catholic who confesses his sins to a priest any better off than the non-Catholic who confesses directly to God? Yes. First, he seeks forgiveness the way Christ intended. Second, by confessing to a priest, the Catholic learns a lesson in humility, which is avoided when one confesses only through private prayer. Third, the Catholic receives sacramental graces the non-Catholic doesn’t get; through the sacrament of penance sins are forgiven and graces are obtained. Fourth, the Catholic is assured that his sins are forgiven; he does not have to rely on a subjective "feeling." Lastly, the Catholic can also obtain sound advice on avoiding sin in the future.

During his lifetime Christ sent out his followers to do his work. Just before he left this world, he gave the apostles special authority, commissioning them to make God’s forgiveness present to all people, and the whole Christian world accepted this, until just a few centuries ago. If there is an "invention" here, it is not the sacrament of penance, but the notion that the sacramental forgiveness of sins is not to be found in the Bible or in early Christian history. - Unknown Author

(Taken from Catholic Answers web site with some editing to shorten it and to use for scripture references the Douay Rheims and Knox Catholic bible.)

In the past we have spoken about the importance of having authority in our lives. I would like to do a quick review and then answer some frequently ask questions concerning authority in our lives.

In Scriptures, God outlines authority structures that provide direction for the family, church, workplace, and government. “Let every soul be subject to higher powers: for there is no power but from God: and those that are, are ordained of God.” (Romans 13:1).

God Is the Source of All Authority

By virtue of Who He is as creator of all things, God is the sovereign ruler of the universe. He has all power and all authority, and He entrusts roles of leadership to individuals in the family, the church, the workplace, and the government.

The orderliness we find in structures of authority reflects the order of God’s own nature. God is a Trinity: the Father, the Son Jesus Christ, and the Holy Spirit. The Father sent the Son into the world as Savior and Redeemer. (See I John 4:9.) Jesus was obedient to God the Father. (See John 5:19.) When Jesus returned to heaven, He and the Father sent the Holy Spirit to comfort Jesus’ disciples, lead them in all truth, remind them of the words of Jesus, and empower the Apostles to carry out Jesus’ commission to spread the Gospel. (See John 14:26, 15:26, and Acts 1:8.)

Each member of the Trinity works within the structure of authority and fulfills a specific role, perfectly complementing the others and demonstrating God’s glory. The members are not independent of one another, but God the Father is recognized as the authority Who directs and empowers the Son and Holy Spirit to carry out His will.

Four Biblical Authority Structures

God ordained human authority in four areas and established a specific chain of command in each area. This structure does not express superiority or inferiority. Just as each member of the Trinity is essential to express the fullness of God, so within social structures each role in the chain of authority is necessary for the success of the relationship.

Family: Husband—Wife—Children

God entrusts husbands with the leadership of the family unit. A husband is to love his wife as he loves himself. A wife is to submit to the leadership of her husband, coming alongside him as a helpmate. Parents are responsible to train their children, and children are to honor and obey their parents. (See Ephesians 5:21–6:4 and Proverbs 6:20–21.)

Government: National leaders—Local officials—Citizens

In Scripture we are instructed to respect and obey government authorities and ordinances and to live honorably within our communities. National leaders and local officials are to punish evildoers and honor those who do well. (See I Peter 2:13–17 and Romans 13:1–5.)

Church: Church leaders—Church members

Within the church, the leadership of our Popes, Bishops, and Priest is essential for the health of the Body of Christ. Believers are to honor and respect the clergy and to submit to one another and walk in humility. (See Ephesians 4:11–16, Hebrews 13:17, and I Peter 5:1–11.)

Business: Employers—Employees

Employers are challenged to act with equity and care as they oversee employees, patterning their behavior after God Himself, Who is their authority. Employees are responsible to serve well, doing their work wholeheartedly as unto the Lord. (See Colossians 3:22–4:1 and I Peter 2:18.)

That was the review. Here are the most asked questions concerning Authority:

How old do I have to be before I am out from under authority?

We never outgrow the need to be under authority, and, in fact, we are commanded to be under authority at all times. Ye young men, be subject to the ancients. And do you all insinuate [to gently introduce] humility one to another, for God resisteth the proud, but to the humble he giveth grace.(I Peter 5:5)

When does the parental "chain of responsibility" end?

The parental "chain of responsibility" ends when they delegate that authority to someone else- as in marriage or when some one enters the religious life. However, even before this, a certain measure of independence should be earned by learning to discern and obey the wishes of parents. When they are confident that we will do what they would do in a given situation, they will give more freedom to make decisions.

What if I am an adult and still single?

By this time, we should have earned the position of being in a "chain of counsel" If we haven't, there must be some serious deficiencies in our attitudes or understanding.
Whatever our age, however, we are instructed in Scripture and by the Church to always be responsive to our parents counsel: "Hearken to thy father, that beget thee: and despise not thy mother when she is old." (Proverbs 22:23)

Under whose authority am I if my parents are divorced?

The Parent who is legally responsible for you becomes your direct chain of responsibility. The separated parent may be a part of your chain of counsel. If the parent with whom you are living remarries, he or she automatically delegates part of his or her authority to your step parent.

What if parents don't care what I do?

There are reasons why a parent has ceased caring what his teen-ager does. The main reason is usually that in the past the teen-ager has had a strong will and has done what he wanted to anyway. The parents then just stop competing with him.
When a teen-ager dedicates his life to the Lord and clears his conscience with his parents and places himself under their authority, he or she will usually see a gradual or a dramatic change in their concern for what he or she does.

What if I'm single and living in an apartment?

First, be very sure that God has led you to move away from your parents, and that they were fully in harmony with the move. When God designed the family structure, He purposed that each one in the family meet basic needs for the others-especially social needs. When a single person leaves his family apart from God's direction, he exposes himself to many unnecessary temptations to wrongly fulfill these social needs. If your parents are in full harmony with your move to another location, it is important to maintain good lines of communication with them in order to receive counsel from them.

What if I am a widow or divorced?

Your direct line of authority would be to God. However, it would be very essential to build around your life as many godly counselors as you can, especially parents and parents-in-law. God takes special care of the widow. He is their protector: "Who is the father of orphans, and the judge of widows. God in his holy place" (Psalms 67:6 DRB/ 68:5) The book of Ruth in the Old Testament gives significant guidance to the young widow.

If you are divorced and your former husband is not remarried, take whatever steps you can to be reunited. By so doing, you will be able to get back under his "umbrella of protection," and allow God to work through the marriage to achieve Christ's character. If you have done what you can and still find your relationship broken, then your line of authority would be to God, and you will want to build the same godly counselors as the widow would.

What if I married the wrong person?

Your marriage may not have been one that God would have arranged; however, since He has established the authority of the marriage relationship, He will use whatever marriage you enter into to perfect His character in you. When your ways please the Lord, He will will even make your enemies to be at peace with you. (Proverbs 16:7)

What if I don't respect the authority over me?

It is important that we learn how to distinguish between an authority's position under God and his human personality. We are to reverence his position, although at the same time we may be very aware of personality deficiencies.
To say that we reject an authority because we don't respect him would be as much in error as tearing up a speeding ticket because we didn't like the attitude of the police officer.