man shutteth; and shutteth, and no man openeth." (Rev. iii. 7.) And it need scarcely be added, that it is God only who can forgive sins. The Jewish church, with all its corruptions at the time of our Lord's appearance upon earth, testified to this truth. There is a most striking contrast between the mode in which our Lord speaks of the forgiveness of sin, and the language invariably used by Peter and all the apostles. "Jesus, seeing their faith, said unto the sick of the palsy, Son, be of good cheer; thy sins be forgiven thee. And, behold, certain of the scribes said within themselves, This man blasphemeth. And Jesus, knowing their thoughts, said, Wherefore think ye evil in your hearts? For whether is easier to say, Thy sins be forgiven thee; or to say, Arise, and walk? But that ye may know that the Son of man hath power to forgive sins, (then saith he to the sick of the palsy,) Arise, take up thy bed, and walk. And he arose, and departed to his house." (Matt. ix. 2-7.) This portion of Scripture furnishes a most complete and conclusive testimony. Our Lord in plain terms declares that He has power to forgive sins. The scribes say within themselves, that for a man to arrogate this power is blasphemy. Christ confirms this truth, by giving a proof of His Divinity, in showing openly His knowledge of what was passing in their hearts. He wrought a miracle of healing to attest His power to forgive sins. It is manifest that the power to forgive sins, can only be associated with the attribute of omniscience-the knowledge of the thoughts of men's hearts; and this is an attribute of Deity Himself, and cannot be possessed or even communicated to man. The knowledge of what is passing in one man's heart, may be revealed by God to

another man, but God only can search the heart of man. There is not one passage in all Scripture to support such a presumptuous interpretation of the passage under review.

There is a more modified sense in which it has been interpreted, that, "Jesus Christ hath given power and commandment to his ministers to declare and pronounce to his people, being penitent, the absolution and remission of their sins." There is no doubt a very material difference between this interpretation and the former. Still it is only a difference of degree; the error is precisely of the same kind in both cases. In the one case the priest dispenses forgiveness himself. In the other case the minister declares that God has absolved. In the one case the priest arrogates the prerogative of Deity. In the other case the minister appears to act, as if he knew the purpose of Deity. I desire to speak with the utmost kindness and tenderness of my christian brethren, many of whom use these words from sabbath to sabbath in their public ministrations. I know they love the Lord Jesus Christ in sincerity. I beseech them to examine this matter prayerfully in God's sight, and judge for themselves. I bear them upon my spirit while I write. I must be faithful. The glory of my Master, their great good, my own accountability, demands this of me. Dear christian brethren, bear then with me. There can be no mistake as to the idea actually conveyed, and intended to be conveyed, to the minds of the worshippers by this part of the form of public worship. It is thus described, "The absolution, or remission of sins, to be pronounced by the priest alone standing: the people still kneeling." It is also a part of the devotional exercise of the sanctuary;

and although it could be said that it was not intended, who can dispute, that the people regard, and really, if there be any sense at all in the ceremony, it cannot but mean that the general confession of the whole congregation having been made immediately preceding, the priest, in virtue of the divine command, declares the absolution and remission of sins. It is no doubt true, that the words, "being penitent," are used to qualify the absoluteness of the declaration. This might remove in part the offensiveness in God's sight; but such an explanation gives to the whole ceremony, the appearance of a solemn trifling with God's worship. If the people, or any number of them, are penitent, it is not the priest who can either absolve or assure them of absolution. Alas! alas! for me, a poor sinner, however grieved and sorrowful because of my sins, if I had no other assurance of forgiveness than man can give upon my profession of penitence. I ask every sincere believer, Is it not the testimony of God's Spirit with your spirit, that gives you the only assurance of absolution or remission of sin? Is it not the peace and the joy which God, by His Spirit works in you, that is the only ground of your confidence that you are forgiven? I ask, if you had not that testimony within yourself, would you be satisfied though all the world declared the contrary? Then, if the Spirit alone can testify the absolution and remission of sins; and if a declaration of remission, pronounced by man, cannot avail without the inward testimony of God's Holy Spirit, why will man intrude himself into Jehovah's province? Where penitence is truly felt, man's help is not needed; where it is not felt, man's help availeth nothing. If this were the true meaning of the ceremony, it could not exist; and, however pain

ful, the conclusion is unavoidable, that the people are expected to regard the declaration of the priest, as a positive assurance of the remission of their sins. I fear, whatever be the intention, this is the effect produced, and this is the only idea which such a ceremony can convey to an intelligent and thoughtful mind; how much more so to the minds of those, who think little upon any subject. If confirmation be still awanting, the act preceding the declaration of absolution supplies it. If the people had made no public confession of penitence, before the declaration of the remission of sin, the words, "being penitent," might qualify the offensiveness of the act: but the people have already declared themselves penitent by a public confession of their sin, and because of this, and subsequent to this, the priest or minister pronounces absolution. Therefore the words, "being penitent," instead of modifying the absoluteness of the priest's declaration, rather gives peculiar force and efficacy to it; for except the public confession of sin is to be regarded as an idle and unmeaning act, the priest is but following it up by its supposed legitimate effect, and he must take for granted the sincerity of the worshippers; so that these words must be regarded, not as qualifying the declaration of absolution, but as expressive of the people's penitence. Any other interpretation involves the repetition, from sabbath to sabbath, of a sin which I tremble to contemplate. Either the people are sincere, or they are not. Their sincerity leads to one difficulty-the priest's presuming to be a judge of that sincerity, and acting upon it; and further, a judge of God's mind to the particular penitents. "What man knoweth the things of a man, save the spirit of man, which is in him? even so the things of

God knoweth no man, but the Spirit of God." (1 Cor. ii. 11.) The people's insincerity leads to another difficulty not less insurmountable. The church has instituted, and is every sabbath-day acting upon, a form in the worship of God which encourages the heinous sin of hyprocisy. If it is not meant, in any sense, to assure even a penitent of his forgiveness, the ceremony should be abolished. If it is meant to assure only the penitent of forgiveness, then not only is such an assurance from man wholly unnecessary, even could he really give it; but it is a trenching upon the high and holy prerogatives of the Divine Being. It is man interposing between God and the soul of another man, and that in a matter regarding which God has explicitly declared, "I am the Lord; that is my name; and my glory I will not give to another; neither my praise to graven images." (Isa. xlii. 8.) And what is idolatry, but the giving to the creature what is due to the Creator.

This implied command is not to be found in the Scriptures. The Mosaic dispensation, in which the priests actually offered the atonements for the sins of the people, is most specially guarded in this respect. The offering of the atonement is the duty of the priest; but he is not commanded to declare the absolution and remission of the sins of those who present the sacrifices. The divine command concerning the great atonement which was to be made once a year for the children of Israel for all their sins, is thus written-" And when he hath made an end of reconciling the holy place, and the tabernacle of the congregation, and the altar, he shall bring the live goat: and Aaron shall lay both his hands upon the head of the live goat, and confess over him all the iniquities of the children of Israel, and all