name; not in exempting himself from the common lot, and affecting not to mix with mean occupations and persons: nor yet in affecting that peculiar spirituality which is above human joys, and human pleasures, and human needs. But it lies in this, in being not superhuman, but human; in being through and through a man, according to the Divine Idea; a man whose chief privilege it is to be a minister—that is, a servant, a follower of Him Who "came not to be ministered unto, but to minister, and to give His Life a ransom for many."

LECTURE XI.

THE CHRISTIAN IDEA OF ABSOLUTION.

2 CORINTHIANS, ii. 10, II.- -November 23, 1851. (MORNING SERMON.)

N order that we may more fully understand the meaning of

St. Paul, I have determined to enter on the question of Absolution to-day, and have therefore deviated from the direct line of exposition, and taken a text from the Second Epistle, in which the principle of Christian absolution is fully comprised.

In the First Epistle to the Corinthians St. Paul refers to a crime which had brought great scandal on their Church: and it seems that, instead of being shocked, the Corinthians rather gloried in their laxity, or as they called it, liberality.

On the offender the Apostle had demanded that a severe punishment should fall. They were to "put away from themselves that wicked person." But in the interval which had elapsed between the two Epistles a great change had taken place. The Corinthians had obeyed, and that in earnest. Their indignation and zeal had been thoroughly roused, and the terrible treatment of society had wrought a deep remorse in the offender, which was threatening to pass into despair.

In this Second Epistle, therefore, he requires forgiveness, he reverses his mode of treatment-ii. 6, 7. In the text he ratifies that forgiveness. Here, then, we are brought face to face with the fact of Christian Absolution. For, let us clearly

understand this forgiveness was not forgiveness of an offence against the Apostle, or against any man. It was not a debt, nor an insult—it was a crime. And yet, though a crime against God, St. Paul says, "I forgive it, you must forgive it." He did not say, "He must confess to God, perhaps God will forgive." Here there is evidently a sin against God forgiven. by man. Here then, is the fact of Absolution.

66

This is our subject; one which is a battle-ground between Romanists and Protestants. I shall not attempt to steer adroitly a middle course between Romanism and Protestantism, the first asserting an absolving power in the priesthood, the second denying it in every shape and form to any human being. I shall avoid that via media which to timid minds seems safe and judicious because not going into extremes, but which does yet like all weak things, manage to embrace the evils of both, and the good of neither. But as on other occasions, I shall try to seize that deep truth which lies at the root of both views, and which can alone explain the difficulties which beset the question. We will consider, then,

First-False conceptions respecting Absolution.

Secondly-The Scripture principle on which it rests.

I. The first would be a denial in toto of the existence of such a power in any sense. There are, and were, men who might have objected to St. Paul, as the scribes did to his Lord

-"Who is this that forgiveth sins also? Who can forgive sins but God only?" And observe there was much truth in that objection-Who can forgive sins but God? And if a man may absolve another man, will not sin be committed easily and carelessly? Will not the salutary effect of dread and of uncertainty be done away with? How dangerous to remove the apprehension of punishment! How fearful to send any one to a brother man instead of to God alone! These are plausible difficulties, and in great part true. But still remember how Christ replied to that objection. He performed a miracle to

show that, as He could do the difficult thing-as He could say with power-"Arise, and take up thy bed and walk," so He could do the more difficult-"Thy sins be forgiven thee."

Now, it is often said that by that miracle He proved His Godhead, that He took them at their word. "No one can forgive sins but God." See then, I can forgive; therefore I am God. But to read the passage so is utterly to lose the meaning. He did not say that He forgave as God. He expressly said that He forgave as man-"That ye may know that the Son of Man hath power on earth to forgive sins." He says nothing about the forgiveness by God in heaven. All He speaks of is respecting the power of forgiveness by man on earth. But whatever we may make of that passage, our text is one which cannot be twisted. We say, Christ forgave as the Messiah, not as man: He did not speak of a power belonging to any son of man, but . to the Son of Man. Be it so: but here is a passage which cannot be so got over. His Apostle Paul, a son of man, uses words identical with His: "To whom ye forgive anything, I forgive." We are driven then, to the conclusion that in some sense or other human beings have an absolving power.

2. The second error is that which would confine this power to the Apostles. "St. Paul absolved-yes: but St. Paul was inspired; he could read hearts, and could absolve because he knew when penitence was real; but you must not extend that to men now." In reply to this observation, take two facts. 1. We have been denying for 300 years that man's forgiveness can be in any sense an assurance of God's. We have fiercely, "like good Protestants," opposed any absolving power in man. What has been our success? Surely it has been failure. We have said, "Go to God, He forgives." But men have not gained rest or peace by this. Out of the very

ranks of Protestantism men and women are crying-" Absolve me from the weight of sin that I cannot bear alone." Shall we then, in rigid dogmatism, cruelly say, "There is nothing for you beyond this-Go to God," which we have said a thousand times? or shall we say, "It is time to pause and ask ourselves what real truth lies at the bottom of this irrepressible desire? However Rome may have caricatured the truth, let us not fear to search it out."

Again. Whether you will or not, this power is a fact: for thus runs Christ's commission to His Church : 66 Whosesoever sins ye remit, they are remitted unto them; and whosesoever sins ye retain, they are retained." Say, if you will, that was a peculiar power, limited to the Apostles. Nevertheless, the fact cannot be controverted, that every day and every hour Society -Man-exerts this power. For example: There are sins after committing which Society permits a return; there are others in which Society is inexorable. In military life cowardice is branded with irrevocable infamy. Among women another class of sins admits of no return. You are permitted by the world to defraud your tradesman; debts may be "honourably contracted" which there is no ability of paying but if a gambler shirks his "debts of honour," he has to fly disgraced. And the results of this are clear. A man may be, in military life, dissipated, which is morally as bad as cowardice; a woman may be selfish or censorious, or kill by bitter words; and yet these are faults not made hopeless by Society: they leave room for other excellences they do not blight character. But for a coward, or a "daughter of shame," once fallen, there is no return. Down, down, and deeper yet to the deeps of infamy, must one sink on whom Society has set its black mark.

Here is a fearful exercise of power. The sins which Society has bound on earth are bound; the sins which Society has loosed, are thereby robbed of a portion of their curse. power often wrongly used, but still an incontrovertible, terrific

It is a