In the January issue and in these Comments, we referred to a press report which indicated that the assistant minister of Glasgow Cathedral congregation—Church of Scotland—had suggested in a sermon that provision should be made for Confession. We criticised this item thus: “If we are not mistaken, the Confession in view is to be after the Romish pattern,” etc. A Church of Scotland correspondent has written to say, “There was a sermon preached in Glasgow Cathedral on ‘Confession.’ The said sermon made it clear that there was no agreement with R.C. practice of confession. Rather was it Calvin who was cited. The point being that, in a large city, a minister does not know everyone in the parish . . . if they are in spiritual distress or need, they must therefore sometimes take the step of approaching the minister with their troubles.” The correspondent also states that this is traditional practice within the Protestant section of Christ’s Church. Having herewith recorded this rejoinder to our previous comments, we would add some observations.
The term “Confession,” when used by ministers of the Protestant Church in the context of people of the Church coming to consult ministers regarding their spiritual or moral troubles, is in our opinion misleading, if and when, it does not refer to confession of sin to the minister, after the Romish practice. He refers to the fact that Calvin was cited in the sermon concerned. A few years ago Rev. Dr. George MacLeod made the following statement in a speech in the General Assembly: “Many sin sick persons in Scotland have no way of confessing,” or words to that effect. We criticised this statement in a similar manner to our note and comment in January issue. Dr. MacLeod wrote us, finding fault with our observations and also referred us to Calvin. Later we dealt with Calvin’s statements on “Confession” and quoted the relevant parts from his Institutes. In looking up these again we find in the Index at the end of the Institutes the reference: “Confession must be directed to God alone . . . Popish errors concerning,” etc. In consulting
Book Third, Chapter IV, “. . . of confession and satisfaction,” we find Calvin dealing with several aspects of “Confession.”
In his dissertation upon “Confession,” Calvin quotes Chrysostom as saying, among other things, “Now, however, it is not necessary to confess before witnesses; let the examination of your faults be made in your own thought . . . let the judgment be without a witness: let God alone see you confessing. Again, I do not lead you publicly into the view of your fellow-servants; I do not force you to disclose your sins to men; review and lay open your conscience before God. Show your wounds to the Lord, the best of physicians, and seek medicine from Him. . . . Certainly tell it not to man lest he upbraid you . . . but show your wounds to the Lord, who takes care of you, who is kind and can cure” (Calvin’s Institutes: Chapter iv, para. 8).
And Calvin writes, “Since it is the Lord who forgives, forgets and wipes away sins, to Him let us confess them, that we may obtain pardon.” He makes these observations in his paragraph which deals strictly with the doctrine of ‘Confession to God only.’ He ends the paragraph thus: “To whom are we to confess? to Him surely—that is, we are to fall down before Him with a grieved and humbled heart, and, sincerely accusing and condemning ourselves, seek forgiveness of His goodness and mercy.”
Now, we are well aware of the practice whereby a person in spiritual trouble or distress may consult his minister for spiritual advice, guidance or encouragement. This is private consultation and to use the term “Confession” in this connection is misleading. It is true that Calvin appears, in one section of his Institutes, to lend support to the practice of private confession to one’s pastor. He does so in his expressed views on “Confess your faults one to another . . .” (James v: 16). He states, “The meaning is, that by disclosing our infirmities to each other, we are to obtain the aid of mutual counsel and consolation.” We note here the words “mutual counsel.” Then he comments, “The other (confession) is to be made for the sake of our neighbour, to appease and reconcile him if by our fault he has been in any respect injured.” Calvin does not quote the whole of the above text, which continues: “And pray one for another, that ye may be healed.”
But Calvin extends his application of this portion of Scripture. He continues: “In the former, although James, by not specifying any particular individual into whose bosom we are to disburden our feelings, leaves us the free choice of confessing to any member of the Church who may seem fittest; yet as for the most part
pastors are to be supposed better qualified than others, our choice ought chiefly to fall upon them.” And after other observations Calvin continues: “Let every believer, therefore, remember that if in private he is so agonised and afflicted by a sense of his sins that he cannot obtain relief without the aid of others, it is his duty . . . viz., to have recourse for relief to a private confession to his own pastor, and for consolation privately implore the assistance of him whose business it is, both in public and private, to solace the people of God with Gospel doctrine.”
We cannot agree with the aforesaid advice of Calvin without qualification and much caution. He, himself adds a word of caution to his advice to confess to a pastor as follows:—”But we are always to use moderation, lest in a matter as to which God prescribes no certain rule, our consciences be burdened with a certain yoke.” He enlarges on this aspect of the matter, yet allowing the practice to certain cases.
In referring back to the Epistle of James, Chapter v, verse 16: “Confess your faults one to another”; the Rev. Dr. E. H. Plumptre, D.D., Professor of New Testament Exegesis, King’s College, London (1878), writes upon this verse thus: “The words refer the rule of this mutual confession to the promise of forgiveness as its ground. In details the precept is singularly wide. The confession is not to be made by the layman to the elder, more than by the elder to the layman . . . the writer (James) urges the habit of mutual prayer. . .”
We must therefore take care not to exalt the pastor of a Protestant congregation to the position of being, by virtue of his office and Christian experience, the principal person to whom a distressed soul may confess sin with a view to consolation being obtained. The Scriptures do not authorise any troubled soul to lay bare their heart sins and secret sins to any man, whoever he be. They may indeed consult another for spiritual guidance and encouragement while distressed about their sins.
Although Rev. H. R. Wyllie, assistant minister of Glasgow Cathedral, made the point that he has no sympathy with the Romish practice of “Confession,” yet, we are of the view, that when the term “Confession” is used in certain quarters in application to the recommended practice, that distressed persons should approach their pastors privately, the term “Confession” is intended to mean something more than just mutual consultation. We have authentic information that after the sermon in question, Rev. Dr. N. Davidson discussed the sermon with members of the congregation and at this discussion forms of Absolution were referred to. Rev. H. R. Wyllie was not present at this disc.
“I acknowledge my sin unto Thee, and mine iniquity have I not hid. I said, I will confess my transgressions unto the Lord; and Thou forgavest the iniquity of my sin” (Ps. xxxii: v. 5).