The instance to which all this is preliminary, is the pertinacious hold which the belief in a human absolving power retains upon mankind.  There has perhaps never yet been known a religion without such a belief.  There is not a savage in the islands of the South Pacific who does not believe that his priest can shield him from the consequences of sin.  There was not a people in antiquity who had not dispensers of Divine favour.  That same belief passed from Paganism into Romanism.  It was exposed at the period of the Reformation.  A mighty reaction was felt against it throughout Europe.  Apparently the whole idea of human priesthood was proved, once and for ever, to be baseless; human mediation, in every possible form, was vehemently controverted; men were referred back to God as the sole absolver.

Yet now again, three centuries after, the belief is still as strong as ever.  That which we thought dead is alive again, and not likely it seems, to die.  Recent revelations have shown that confession is daily made in the country whose natural manners are most against it; private absolution asked by English men and given by English priests.  A fact so significant might lead us well to pause, and ask ourselves whether we have found the true answer to the question.  The negation we have got—­the vehement denial; we are weary of its reiteration:  but the positive truth which lies at the bottom of this craving—­where is that?

Parliaments and pulpits, senators and clergymen, have vied with each other in the vehemence with which they declare absolution un-Christian, un-English.  All that is most abominable in the confessional has been with unsparing and irreverent indelicacy forced before the public mind.  Still, men and women, whose holiness and purity are beyond slander’s reach, come and crave assurance of forgiveness.  How shall we reply to such men?  Shall we say, “Who is this that speaketh blasphemies? who can forgive sins, but God only?” Shall we say it is all blasphemy; an impious intrusion upon the prerogatives of the One Absolver?  Well, we may; it is popular to say we ought; but you will observe, if we speak so, we do no more than the Pharisees in this text:  we establish a negation; but a negation is only one side of truth.

Moreover, we have been asserting that for 300 years, with small fruits.  We keep asserting, Man cannot give assurance that sin is pardoned; in other words, man cannot absolve:  but still the heart craves human assurance of forgiveness.  What truth have we got to supply that craving?  We shall therefore, rather try to fathom the deeps of the positive truth which is the true reply to the error; we shall try to see whether there is not a real answer to the craving contained in the Redeemer’s words, “The Son of Man hath power on earth to forgive sins.”  What power is there in human forgiveness?  What does absolution mean in the lips of a son of man?  These are our questions for to-day.  We shall consider two points.

    I. The impotency of the negation. 
   II.  The power of the positive truth.