many pious minds, which materially interfered with the intended comfort and edification of this holy ordinance. Let the sincere disciple of Christ, therefore, cast off this fearful apprehension, and having duly examined himself and renewed his purposes of holy obedience, let him thus eat that bread and drink that wine, which were appointed as emblems not of divine wrath, but of the dying love of a crucified Redeemer.

ARTICLE XI.

Of Confession.

In regard to confession they teach, that private absolution ought to be retained in the churches ; but that an enumeration of all our transgressions is not requisite in confession. For this is an impossibility, according to the declaration of the Psalmist: Who can understand his errors?

Although the churches advocated the retention of confession, they entirely changed its nature, and divested it of the objectionable features belonging to it in the Roman Catholic church. a) They declare it void of scriptural authority, and merely regard it as a custom of the church, which, in the case of true penitents, may tend to tranquillize the conscience; and which affords the pastor a convenient opportunity for personal interview with each communicant. In discussing the abuses of the Roman church, which were corrected by the Reformers, they

expressly declare1 that "Confession before or to a priest is not commanded in scripture." b) They denied that the priest has the power absolutely to forgive sins, either at confession or elsewhere, attributing to him only that declarative power conceded by all Protestants, of announcing to the applicant the conditions on which God has promised to forgive sins; and leaving it to the conscience of the sinner himself and the judgment of the all-seeing God, to decide whether he possesses these qualifications. "It is not" (say they)2 "the declaration of the officiating priest which we are to believe, but the word of God, who forgives our sins." c) They reject as unscriptural and improper, "penance, indulgences, pilgrimages," &c. And d) declare that "we obtain pardon solely by faith" in the Lord Jesus. The rite of private absolution has however since been entirely rejected by the Lutheran church, and nothing but the following custom retained, viz. That on the day prior to the time of preparatory service, and sometimes also before and after the preparatory service itself, the intended communicants visit the pastor in his house, or some other suitable place, and give him an opportunity of conversing with them individually on their spiritual condition, and of recording their names in the sacramental register.

At the preparatory service, after singing and prayer, a suitable discourse is delivered, the object of which is to assist the hearers in examining themselves, in order to bring them to a sense of their sinfulness, to induce them to humble themselves before the throne of God, to seek forgiveness of sins in the blood of the Redeemer, and to make the solemn resolution to amend their lives. After this, questions embodying a confession of sins and reliance on the Saviour for pardon are proposed by the pastor, and answered affirmatively by all who feel able thus to reply. The congregation then kneels, the pastor offers up

1 Art. 25. On the Abuses of Confession.

2 Ibid. loc. cit.

a fervent prayer of confession, after which, when the audience has arisen, he repeats the promises of God to pardon truly penitent and believing souls; and warns all to guard against selfdeception or hypocrisy, because (he adds) the sins of hypocrites and unbelievers God will not pardon, notwithstanding their external confession.

In some of our churches the abovenamed visit of the people to the pastor for the purpose of private and personal interview with them, has become obsolete.

ARTICLE XII.

Of Repentance.

Concerning repentance they teach, that those who have relapsed into sin after baptism, may at any time obtain pardon, when they repent and that the church ought to grant absolution (restore to church privileges) such as manifest repentance. But repentance properly consists of two parts. The one is contrition or dread on account of acknowledged sin. The other is faith, which is produced by the gospel, or by means of absolution : which believes that pardon for sin is bestowed for Christ's sake; which tranquillizes the conscience, and liberates it from fear. Such repentance must be succeeded by good works as its fruits.

They condemn the doctrine of such as deny, that those who have once been justified, may lose the Holy Spirit. In like manner those who contend, that some persons attain so high a degree of perfection in this life, that they cannot sin. They reject also those, who are unwilling to absolve (restore to church privileges) such as have backslidden after baptism, even if they repent: as also those who teach that remission of sins is not obtained through faith; but require us to merit grace by our good works.

The nature and constituent parts of true repentance, have already been discussed, in the consideration of the moral changes wrought in the mind of the sinner, by the Holy Spirit through the means of grace, (Art. VI.,) to which the reader is referred. By an enumeration of the constituent parts of repentance, taken in its general sense, the Confessors designed to contradict the erroneous views of the Papists, who teach that repentance consists of these three parts, contrition of heart, oral confession to a priest, and satisfaction, by performing certain meritorious works of penance, prescribed by the priest.

The latter clause of this article touches on the doctrines of final perseverance and sinless perfection, both of which are rejected by the Confessors.

There is a slight variation between the phraseology of the German and the Latin original, in regard to the former of these opinions. The language of the latter we have given above; the German copy says: "We reject the opinion of those who teach, that such as have once become pious, cannot fall from grace." The sense of both readings is substantially the same. Both clearly refer to the doctrine of final perseverance; because all parties admitted the possibility of a believer's tempora

ry relapse into sin. The Latin original specifies this as an error of the Anabaptists. The followers of Zuingli are not also here referred to, because this doctrine formed no part of their creed; and the Institutes of Calvin were not yet in existence.1 When therefore we recollect, that Melancthon composed the Augsburg Confession out of the Torgau Articles which Luther had written, and that, when completed, it was submitted to the review, and received the entire sanction of Luther; we are unable to see any more reason to doubt, that at the time when this confession was presented, A. D. 1530, Luther had rejected the error here condemned, than that he had renounced the papal corruptions rejected in the same articles. The fact that his subsequent publications occasionally exhibit language inconsistent with this article of the Confession, only proves that this great master spirit of the Reformation, had not leisure, amid the overwhelming labours of his life, fully to systematize his views, and adjust his phraseology to the minute relations of the theological system.2

The following extract, translated from his Hauspostille, by the Rev. Mr. Kurtz, the able editor of the Lutheran Observer, may serve as a specimen of Luther's language on this subject.

"For many be called but few chosen.'-Matt. 20: 16. Some put their own construction on these words and explain them thus: Many be called, that is, God tenders his grace to many, but few are chosen, that is, he bestows his grace on few, because few are to be saved. But this is indeed a wicked interpretation, for how is it possible for one, entertaining such ideas of the divine character, not to be an enemy of God, whose will alone, accord

1 They were first published in 1533.

2 On the question, whether Luther retained those doctrines afterwards known as the peculiarities of Calvin, see Schlosseri Lutherus Lutheranus; in which the author demonstrates the opinion above expressed, by copious citations from Luther's works on all the distinguishing points, and especially unconditional election and reprobation,