After all this testimony, it may be regarded as incontestably established, that the former symbolical books of our church do teach private confession and absolution, with some modifications, and hence, that the church in Sweden and Denmark always rejected this part of the Augsburg Confession, in practice, and that the entire church in Germany and the United States, which now use a public confession, have made a similar departure from the teachings of the Augsburg Confession as well as of Luther, Melancthon and the other Lutheran reformers.

2.  That this rite of private confession, is unauthorized by any command of the Word of God, in so clear, that the Symbolical books themselves admit it, and commend the rite merely on the ground of human expediency, and inferential scriptural reasoning.  The same acknowledgment is made by the Plea of the Rev. Mr. Mann.  In Art.  XXVI. of Augsburg Confession, being Topic V. of the Abuses Corrected, the confession says:  “Confession is not commanded in Scripture, but has been instituted by the church.” [Note 10]

3.  The rite of private absolution, on which the Reformers lay much stress, is in like manner destitute of scriptural authority, and most injurious to the interests of spiritual religion.  The omniscient Saviour could well say to the sick of the palsy, “Son, be of good cheer, thy sins be forgiven thee,” Matt. ix. 2; for he knew the heart of man.

For the same reason he could say to Mary Magdalene, “Thy sins are forgiven.”  Luke vii. 48.

But, even the inspired apostles never in a single instance, either undertook to forgive sins themselves, or to announce the pardon of sin to any individual personally.  It is therefore a solemn thing for ministers, unguided by inspiration, to assume greater power.  To proclaim publicly and privately the willingness of God to pardon the impenitent, is an important and delighful [sic] part of the minister’s duty; but for uninspired men to institute a special rite in the church, for the express purpose of announcing pardon to individuals, even when done conditionally, as the reformers maintained it always should be, is inevitably calculated to lead, especially the less intelligent, to believe their sins forgiven, at least in part, because the ministers announce the fact, and because they have professed penitence to him.  But this is wholly unauthorised in God’s Word.  On the contrary:—­

(a) The Scriptures throughout represent God, and the Lamb of God, as the only beings that can “forgive” and “take away” sin.  Exod. xxxiv. 6, 7.  The Lord passed by before him and proclaimed, “The Lord God, merciful—­forgiving iniquity, transgression and sin.”

The blessed Saviour, in his memorable prayer, teaches us to address our supplication, not to the minister, but to our heavenly Father, “forgive us our sins,” &c., Luke xi. 4.  He says nothing, nor does any writer of the Old or New Testament say a word about advising a resort to the priest or minister to obtain forgiveness of sins.  The same truth is taught in a multitude of other passages.  We refer the reader to a few:  Eph. iv. 32; Acts viii. 22; 1 John i. 9; Matth. ix. 6; Mark xi. 25; 1 Kings viii. 30; 2 Chron. vii. 14; Psalm lxxxvi. 5; Jerem. xxxi. 34; Dan. ix. 19.